Banks and Other American Insitutions Considered Too Big to Fail: It's Cheaper To Keep Them (I)

In the Bible, 1 Corinthians 15, the Apostle Paul wrote in his epistle to the Corinthians about death in these terms.

"Except a corn of wheat were to fall into the ground and die, it could not bring forth wheat ...".

Other cultures teach that death is necessary in order to engender or generate new life. Just think what would happen if we would permit some of these ‘too big too fail institutions’ to fail? New organizations, hopefully better run institutions, would simply replace them. The country didn’t curl up and die because Lehman Brothers was permitted to collapse!

Why wouldn't the Federal Government practice laissez-faire and the principle of caveat emptor this time? It is because the government concluded that what songwriter and singer Jonnie Taylor wrote and recorded, 'It's Cheaper To Keep Her', applied when it comes to banks and other mammoth American organizations?

Let's consider the lyrics of the song.

Title: It's Cheaper To Keep Her

You tied up, you better stay tied up
Cause it's cheaper to keep her, this is from T, who says
It's cheaper to keep her; it's cheaper to keep her

When your little girl makes you mad
And you get an attitude and pack your bags
Five little children that you're leaving' behind
Son, you're gonna pay some alimony or do some time

That's why it's cheaper to keep her (Help me say it, y'all)
It's cheaper to keep her (It's cheaper to keep her)
When you get through starin' that judge in the face
You're gonna want to cuss the whole human race

That's why it's cheaper to keep her (It's cheaper to keep her)
It's cheaper to keep her
(It's cheaper, it's cheaper, it's cheaper, it's cheaper)
(It's cheaper to keep her)

You didn't pay but two dollars to bring the little girl home
Now you're about to pay two thousand to leave her alone
You see another woman out there and you want to make a change
She ain't gonna want you 'cause you won't have a damn thing

That's why it's cheaper to keep her (Everybody Sing along with me)
It's cheaper to keep her (it's cheaper to keep her)
By the time you get through lookin' that judge in the face
You're gonna want to cuss the whole human race

That's why it's cheaper to keep her (It's cheaper to keep her)
It's cheaper to keep her (It's cheaper to keep her)
(It's cheaper, it's cheaper, it's cheaper, it's cheaper)
(It's cheaper to keep her)

I know you think the grass is greener
Way over on the other side
When that judge gives you that dirty look
You may as well put your money in mama's pocketbook

That's why it's cheaper to keep her (It's cheaper to keep her)
It costs too much to leave her alone, yeah (It's cheaper to keep her)
I know it's cheaper to keep her (It's cheaper to keep her)
'Cause you're gonna pay some alimony if you leave home
I tell y'all - it's cheaper to keep her - all the fellows I know are talkin' about it
It's cheaper to keep her, I gotta tell you_______________________________________________

The thrust of Johnnie Taylor's song is essentially this, that no matter what you're going through in your current relationship with your spouse, and no matter how bad that it gets, that it is cheaper to stay with her, than to go through a costly divorce.

The decision to stay with her had nothing to do with love. Rather, if you ended the relationship, whomever was at fault, you could end up paying spousal or a combination of spousal and child divorce payments. The erudite members of America's Federal Government, after weighing the crisis that America suddenly found itself in a year ago, decided not to pursue a divorce.

Despite the crisis that continues to linger unto this day - concluded that despite the causal factors that caused the crises in the marriage between the state, mammoth American institutions and the people (a result of greed, mismanagement and malfeasance, that it was cheaper to stay with these institutions (keep them afloat) rather than to get a divorce from them and their questionable and in some cases criminal practices, rather than to permit them to fail.

Was the writer of the letter of the epistle to the Corinthians correct in his assessment that often you have to permit a seed to die, in order to bring forth new life? If he was correct, then the government just cheated each of out of a chance for a new life, and for our corporate institutions, the American way of life and our government to be born again with new life.

Having said that, banks and other secular institutions are not the only major American institutions that are failing us. There are many other American stalwart institutions that are part and parcel of the American culture that are failing the American populace. But let's review first, before we go on.

President Obama and his administration, to include Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Security Timothy Geithner, concluded, in 2009, that these institutions had to survive despite the predicament that they got themselves into over the span of the past few years – I believe that they failed us.

The only institution that was big enough to underwrite the losses of institutions that were about to go under, despite their questionable fiduciary and business practices, was the United States Federal Government.

And the Obama Administration, following the same pattern of the Bush Administration, jumped right, pushing for a newly created program called the Troubled Asset Relief Program, (TARP), jumped in to save them.

Not even George H. Bush Jr. behaved like a true conservative. The late Syndicated columnist and journalist of ‘Deep Throat’ fame, asked, jovially on news talk show years for his demise, "what is the definition of a compassionate conservative"? He then provided the answer: A compassionate conservative he said, "witnesses a man drowning 40 feet offshore, and in order to help him – he throws him a 15 foot rope". Old Bob, rest his soul, had to laugh at that one himself.

Why? The former Terrapin, probably wouldn’t have tossed a ‘drowning man or a woman’, a 5 foot rope. But George H. Bush Jr. and current President Obama then, both behaved like so-called liberals, they bailed certain institutions, banks, automobile companies … out, with an aid package quicker than you could say, “Where’s the Money Honey”.

Famous comedian, known by most as Sinbad told a story about his college days. Like most college students living on campus, Sinbad was broke. So, he said he decided to write his dad this jovial message. He wrote: “Dad, no mon, no fun, yo son”. Upon receipt of the letter his dad wrote back. “Too bad, so sad, yo dad”.

How many of you suppose that in about another 8 or 9 years, when the Obama girls are in college, that if they misbehaved and misused their college allowances only to write home to ask dad for relief, that Mr. Obama would send a care package to his children as quickly as he did to GM, Shearson-Lehman, Citibank …. Or, on the other hand would he sit the following to his children: "Girls you behaved very badly, and as a result you are going to have to learn from this incident because daddy and mommy are not simply not going to bail you out"?

Most Americans know by now, that the selected institutions which failed or nearly failed, received nearly 1 Trillion in asset relief from the American taxpayers, ala the largesse of the United States Federal Government. On the other hand, several others organizations, by wrote or by vote, in the same manner that American people were abandoned, were simply permitted to collapse.

To wit, that in spite of questionable management practices and the poor business decisions and investments made by of many of the organizations who benefitted from TARP and the Stimulus Package, organizations that were responsible in one way or another of the near collapse of the worldwide economic system, especially the American system: TARP funds represented a bailout for them, if not an outright reward for doing a reprehensible job. The more malfeasance that you engaged in it would seem, the larger the reward these organizations received.

This is analogous, to my way of thinking, of some leader or groups of leaders in let's say, some Banana Republic or some other totalitarian nation that does a horrendous job of governing, but remains in power in order and continues engaging in corruption, being bailed out. But in America? Come on!

And who, ultimately, will foot the bill for what I will refer to as the FAP, the Financial Awards Programs for Corporations? The answer is, the American taxpayers will foot the bill, the American taxpayers, well and China, are footing the bill for now.

I was speaking with a 2-decade friend the other day, who had decided a month ago to apply for relief given his increased mortgage costs. Despite having a credit rating of near 800 and 26 years of service on the same job, when he tried to refinance his mortgage, he was summarily turned down. And who turned him down? It was one of the same financial organizations that benefitted from his portion of tax relief that was given to this major bank through TARP.

He definitely qualified, and still he was summarily turned down. Now folks, there is something wrong with that equations!

So I ask again, despite their motives for picketing and crying foul, is the TEA Party correct in their conclusions about the government's massive bailout? Should it have happened, or should all of these institutions who were bailed out with TARP, and some even as a result of the Recovery Act, been permitted to struggle. Is America more than the sum of its corporations?

Even though their motives, The Tea Party, are suspect, and they ignored the fact that the individuals that they supported on the Republican Right, who contributed mightily to this debacle, former President George H. Bush and the Republican Right, their conclusions appear to be right on about the government having done the wrong thing with the bailout funds.

As some have reported, the relief should have been given to the people, which in turn would have jumpstarted the economy.

In other words, the American citizens would have either saved or spent the money that they received back from the government, and in turn the banks would have benefited and the factories ..., would have begun churning.

As of late, they are holding individuals on the Right's feet to the fire, who voted for TARP. But what is their true motive, who knows. It is that being fiscally is the right thing to do, and then I agree with them. On the other hand, on the other hand their schizophrenic behaviors suggest that they are smoking loco weed or something? Therefore, I don't trust them either.

And if you're wondering about me, frankly, I have never smoked, injected, inhaled, shot up, imbibed. any illegal substances in my life. But I have to wonder what these and too many other Americans smokers are injecting? Were Geithner and Bernanke wrong to help create a program that would bail out the American system and therefore American bankers and financial institutions?

The real question, in my mind, is where were they and others, along with their predecessors before them and our Federal Government before them to have permitted these kinds of shenanigans to take place in the first place, with derivatives, credit default swaps … that led to this near collapse of the American economy and therefore our system in the first place. I didn't get the memo before about these questionable instruments ..., did you?

The lack of regulation, spans several decades, and includes the members of several administrations, congress, the Fed, the Treasury Department, both political parties... But are these the only culprits? Nyat! And what a cover-up?

It is time for banks and other perennial American stalwart institutions that are considered to be too big too fail to be brought into the real world!

And who would argue now, given the recent economic collapse of the worldwide, American led macroeconomic system, the phrase “too big too fail”, has entered into American parlance, if not the American lexicon, for the politicians in Washington DC are showing what they are all about and whose interests they truly have in mind.

The lack of regulation, spans several decades, and includes the members of several administrations, congress, the Fed, the Treasury Department ... But are these the only culprits? Nyat!

All I can say is, wake up and then move over Bugsy and Al Capone, your antics have been trumped by nefarious mainstream institutions and organizations that have enjoyed the full backing, support and bailouts by the American government.

And how many of the leaders of this failed e corporate institutions will go to jail? Answer, not too many so far! How many of Bernie Madoff’s regulator friends in the SEC gone to jail so far? The answer is in the question, for all of these are apparently 'above the laws that the rest of us are obliged to obey'.

And we find these truths to be evident that all men are created equal..."? Answer? I don't think so. Not only aren't all men not created equal, neither are all institutions created equal. Some are and always have been considered to be more equal than others. What is so scary about all of the malfeasance that took place which crippled the American and world economy is that what are saying might be perfectly true, NONE of these folks broke the law. In fact, they may have acted within the laws that were instituted by Congress, in spite of what all of us might consider moral failure.

For don’t these individuals have the responsibility to behave in a moral fashion, even if they can find a loophole that would permit them to do otherwise? There are also other institutions that are equally culpable, some who are also deemed to be 'fail proof' despite their performance, given the deleterious effect that their failing institutions would have on the economy and the American way of 'consume and spend way of life', that most Americans have either become accustomed to or dream of acquiring. They would be bailed out if they were to screw up tomorrow, and incite another crash of the stock market, and other world economies, and what is so bad about this is that they know that they would be bailed out by the American government, whoever the president happened to be.

Let's get back to those other American institutions that are failing, even though they are considered by some still to be 'too big to fail'.

Some of the other institutions that we need to keep an eye are as follows: Some are financial, some are governmental, some are religious, some are medical, some are industrial … and no matter what they do, or don’t do they are considered not to be expendable in their current forms. Consider Medicare, a system that endures fraud and malfeasance to the tune of hundreds of millions a year, is considered too big too fail (do without).

Huge corporations like oil, automobile, steel … are considered to be necessary for most Americans in order to continue the 'American Greed' way of life.

The number, as well as the scope of these mammoth institutions that are considered to be too big to fail transcends American financial institutions. Are we really talking about too big too fail, or too big to fix? Or how about, unable or unwilling to allow these institutions to go away or replace with something more tangible because my friends work there?

In fact, the phenomenon transcends logic. One would ask, then why doesn’t someone do something, and who was on watch when this travesty took place? Which time I ask? Was it the role of the federal government, particularly congress to create and enforce regulations? Isn’t it their role to defend the antitrust laws that they together put into place.

Why were and are certain monopolies allowed to thrive, while others are immediately shut down. Leaving it up to the federal government to regulate these mammoth institutions has proven to be an abject failure, and is the equivalent of leaving the fox to guard the hen house. In fact the federal government, for example, is an example of another institution that we refuse to allow to fail and by that I mean go out of existence, and be replaced by something better, even though at times it appears to be a complete failure as far as the American people are concerned, just as many as the afore-mentioned institutions have been.

It is apparent that the longer that we hold these and other financial and corporate institutions in place in their current form, that the more the American people will be held hostage by these institutions.

Who are some of the other major institutions that are failing us.

For example, political parties, the two main ones Republican and Democratic, are apparently too big too fail. Even though the American people are apparently dissatisfied with either of the big Two, yet the American voters, in droves, go out and vote for political party candidates instead of for individuals.

Personally, I gave up on the pressure from my peers long ago, the ones who convince that me that I was wasting my vote if I did not vote for a candidate that had been put forth by either the democratic or republican parties. Boulderash, I said!

The government continues to defer to institutions like GMAC, Chrysler, AIG and other monopolies, while explaining their failures to the American people and at the same time explaining its reasoning behind buttressing these organizations with taxpayer’s money (even though some of them have clearly failed). How about the equity stakes that the government has made into several of these huge behemoths? Aside from loans, take Citibank into consideration for example!And whose money is the government using to buttress these organizations?When will the government admit that it is a part of the problem and not the solution?

And How About The American Corporate and Cover-up Catholic Church?

And with respect to Protestantism, Bishop T.D. Jakes, one of America’s premiere protestant mega-ministers said:"The Church is a Business"! Is that all that the church is Bishop Jakes? I was there, in Washington DC, when he said it. Just check the Washington Post if you don't believe me.

And Bishop Takes, as I affectingly refer to him, like many other of his mentors and colleagues, ‘takes’, in whatever city or nation that he happens to land in to preach. He is representative of a growing problem with the American Corporate Church. There are many smaller congregations and ministers following his example to raise incredible sums of money and build huge fiefdoms to bolster their legacy. These gentlemen place an incredible weight on the members of their congregations and the churches that they preach at in order to raise incredible sums of money.

So what is wrong with these religious institutions? Who will lead or show the secular institutions the right way, particularly, if you cannot depend on corporate religious institutions to behave any differently from their secular counterparts? Has anyone noticed the lavish lifestyles that these characters are living right down to private airplanes, expensive luxury cars, personal chefs, expensive dwellings ...

Many religious institutions boast of memberships in the billions and others in the millions. Some own vast tracts of properties that are worth trillions of dollars. These institutions wield considerable influence over their parishioners (right down to who and what to vote for) and over the rest of the world including the United States Supreme Court: Five U.S. Supreme Court Justices are Roman Catholic, and two are Jews and the rest protestant.

Can a corporate religious organization have the same problem as any other human organization? It would appear so, because many of these organization that operate in the same manner as their corporate counterparts, with Tax Exempt status of course, are experiencing similar results, i.e., corruption, sexual improprieties, resignations, greed, graft, lawsuits …

Biblical eschatologists: I ask you, are the elements that were written about in the Bible, referring to institutions religious and non, that are melting away?

Many Religious organizations, the Catholic Church for example, and other mainstream protestant religious organizations appear to have clearly outlived their usefulness as well. And, guess what, they are not permitted to fail/go away either.

These organizations clearly are not having any profound effect on America's crime-riddled, hedonistic, greed-driven economy and system, other than molesting our children, and keeping their hands deeply into the pockets of the American people. Isn't it interesting that the head of the largest Church, if you will in the world, the Catholic Church, Pontifus Maximus, is actually a head of State. Many of our smaller ministries, have powerful leaders, among their parishioners. And they consider themselves, by their actions, to also be Heads of State that are concerned only about 'The Benjamins'.

Some of America’s religious organizations, are multi-million dollar fundraising religo-political organizations, even though they clearly have failed America. Consider, Focus on the Family, the 700 Club …, all supporters of neo-fascism, and supporters of the now defunct Bushtanista Party. Why have they been kept around? Some of these organizations maintain annual budgets themselves of 3 to 400 million dollars, and spend a considerable percentage of their budgets to influence policy-decisions among the American people and with the Federal Government!

Dr. Dobson decided to resign recently, having recognized the damage that his inane image was doing, as long as he remained the head of Focus on the Family. I’ve never met Dr. Dobson, however, how could anyone be so dimwitted? Dobson, along with how many other televangelists have been responsible for fomenting hatred for two decades in this nation now, if not being the spiritual heads of religio-political hate groups, having done so under the guise of calling themselves religious organization while pushing their political agendas in the name of the LAWD!

Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council are no better. And how about Pat Robertson, the late Jerry Falwell --- all of these goons were, and are nothing more than self-centered ideologues who have made billions off of the backs of naïve and in some instances unsuspecting Christians.

Dr. Dobson is not gone, instead just like the Ku Klux Klan, a group that you don’t see or hear from them everyday, he is still around and influencing American foreign and domestic policy! Do I dislike the man. Frankly, I believe that he is brilliant, but on the other hand he should have stuck with his profession. He has done considerable damage to the conscience of America.

There are many other pastors that are too big to fail, even though they have already failed the people by putting their own agenda ahead of that of the people!

Americans have rightfully, concluded Houston, ‘that we have a problem within our economic system (given that certain institutions are being buttressed by the American government even when they have been caught with their fingers in the proverbial cookie jar).

And, although these institutions are rife with corruption and have clearly lost their moral and religious compasses, if they ever had one, they are constantly being revitalized by the American taxpayers.

Would we be better off without them? The Apostle Peter in his Epistle wrote, that in some instances, one would have been better off not to have some leaders and teachers, for the last state of those who listened would become even worse than it was before them followed them.

I had an experience recently with a well-known pastor in San Jose California that I have known for years. He is busily building a religious fiefdom himself, and has he been doing so for some years now. Having become suspicious of his changed behavior and attitude, having noticed a peculiar change in his attitude and behavior (after getting together with him after an 8 year hiatus, myself, in the nation's capital).

He was being inexplicably deferential, if not rude to me. Frankly, he no longer reflected the kind spirit that before, was always his hallmark - behavior that was consistent with the Bible that he preaches from. I decided to give him a simple test

How did I test him? I simply said to him, one day at his church, "I Love You"

. And guess what? He didn't have a reply, he simply walked on past me.

One of his assistants asked him to take me on a tour and to show me around his building: the church was in the midst of an expansion project. He refused, and told his elder to show me around eek, I thought, what happened to him and why is he behaving in such a manner?

Americans allow too many institutions and institutional leaders, be they religious or not, to stay around for too long. In some instances they stay around too long, in order to maintain the lavish life-style that they have become accustomed to in deference to the needs of the people. Also, some Americans are afraid to step outside of the box and question some of the things that the culture and religion has taught them.

It is time, I believe, for something radical to take place in the United States. And I believe that with the recent government bail out, that we may have missed our opportunity. America's star in the world has begun to settle if not diminish. Other nations are catching up intellectually, monetarily and military. Oftentimes, when something does not appear to be broken, individuals don't try to fix it. And sadly, they wake up one day and find out that it is too late to do then, what they should have done a long time ago.

I’m not finished. The American people are going to have to wake up, those who have not woke up yet and realize that it is time for a real change in America is now. This nation, a nascent nation of just over 2-decades, cannot survive on its current course without some major upheaval. America is a bi-furcated society, one with too much of the wealth being concentrated in the hands of a few.

We have politicians spending fortunes, Meg Whitman, in California is running in the gubernatorial race. She lives in an area, where there is the highest unemployment rate in the nation. Individuals are loosing their homes, cars, jobs ... Shelter programs are closing, recreational centers are closing and what are the Meg Whitman's of the world doing to help? She has spent approximately 68M trying to get elected to the office of Governor of the State of California.

And even though she is sinking in the poles, she plans to spend and nearly another 150M of her own personal wealth, valued at 1B, in order to get elected. What's wrong with that? My answer is, who needs another politician, who somehow has amassed such a fortune (Goldman Sachs money or not), at the same time that so many, perhaps, 10,000 individuals, both young and old, male and female in San Jose California alone who have host everything and living on America's streets, when at the same time other individuals like Meg enriched themselves.

If Meg looses the election, she will have to consider just how many people and how many institutions she could have helped in Santa Clara County alone, as she pursued more power and a more powerful position for herself.

America's institutions, even the family institution is failing. The American divorce rate, depending on who you believe is about half of those who get married. And in some areas of the country, that rate is at about 80%. America has an immigration problem, and on top of that a gang problems. America is engaged in wars on 2 major fronts, not to mention the war that is taking place on its southern border.

Other nations are threatening America, and America citizens are even participating in terrorist activities against the state ... And what are too many Americans, including the wealthy class concerned about? In the words of the rapper Fifty-Cents, How To Get Rich or Die Trying! .

There is an old saying that goes like this, ‘If it ain’t broke, then don’t fix it’. Then the opposite of that it would seem to me would be, ‘if is broken, then we need to fix it’! Can the current administration fix a problem that it is a part of folks? I don’t think so. Can we rely on religious organizations, with leaders who are following an American Corporate Model, that are trying to enrich themselves help America. I really don't think.

The question, can Satan cast out Satan, words reportedly spoken by Jesus Christ, come to mind? Or better yet, would Satan cast out Satan? In answer to that, I don't think so, and neither do I believe that our croup of icons, political, religious and corporate will never do anything to change the current 'get rich and stay rich' trend in America. .

The American government, over 300,000 registered lobbyists, mammoth monopolies, Wall Street, the rest of the financial system (Market of the Beast), religious organizations… are all in bed together. The rest of, well let’s just say that we need to get together and to start something new before we are swallowed up in the morass of greed in a wealth-driven, I AM NOT MY BROTHER'S KEEPER society!

America and its institutions, beginning with the American form of government, requires a forklift upgrade, because Satan (whatever it is), our government officials at times and well corporate, religious and non, CEOs, are all working together. And, as a result their demonic practices will never cease if we wait for them to correct their own practices and behaviors. The question is can we find a forklift that is big enough to move the problem? And can we wait for any of these structures to police and to then sanction themselves? Haven't we seen enough of this tryst already.

I suspect that going back to a time when a single head of household would abuse his power, without consequences, and Lord it over everyone in the household, that many Americans who are experiencing the same today from our time-honored institutions.

But rather than continuing to play the role of a dependent whimpering wife citizen, who is solely dependent upon her dependent government and corporate mate, that the American people will have to create a system that works for all of the people.

Americans must disabuse themselves our typical institutions, be they religious or non (remember there are dogmatic but abusive teachers and leaders in religion too) and learn to be self-sufficient, that have been and are failing us.

And for those of you who are afraid of change, and would ask what would likely happen if we were to allow some of these bad institutions to go away that all of us in one way or another have supported? I suspect that it would be painful for awhile, but afterwards, we would regroup and rebuild new and better institutions to replace them.

I also believe that we would be better off if power, were not concentrated in the hands of a wealthy, corporate or religiously structured power elite, particularly those individuals and institutions that are in bed with our government officials. We have got to come together, strip away their power and to put in place a system that works, a system that is of, by and for the people!

For how many of the leaders of the failed corporate institutions that exist in America today should, or will go to jail? Answer, not too many so far - and I suspect that not too many of them ever will! Again, how many of Bernie Madoff’s regulator friends in the SEC, who overlooked his misdeeds, have gone to jail so far? How many child-molesting ministers and priests have gone to jail?

The answer is in the question. Will the current administration fix a problem that it is a part of folks? I don’t think so.

Americans, like the spouse who has silently experienced prolonged abuse for perhaps all of her life, all should know by now that there is an existing problem within American institutions. And the American people, like too many an abused spouse, one who can't see any other way of surviving without her abusive mate ought to be able to see now that unless we get together and do something about the problem, that the abuse will continue into perpetuity. Too many are like her, they have simply given in, when it is time for a NEW AMERICAN LIBERATION MOVEMENT!

And make no mistake, about it, the American Federal Government has been bought and sold to the highest bidders - American corporations. And the American people remain the abused spouses of the American government and its paramours that have all gone awry. Why? Because, the American government and the American people for that matter have decided, it would seem, that it is easier to keep her (Things the way hat they are and have been rather than to do anything about our the problem). It's easier, apparently, to do nothing!

On the other hand, American people, why don't we simply pay the alimony (our individual sacrifices, if we have to and get rid of these jerks, so that we can move on and live the lives that we are entitled to live. If we were to do so, at least we will be able to sleep at night, have peace and be able to live with ourselves and to build a bigger America!

Rev. C. Solomon

Banks and other American Institutions Considered Too Big To Fail: It's Cheaper To Keep Them (The Current Policy of The United States Gov't) (II)

Subject: 'It’s Cheaper To Keep Them (Failing, Faltering and Mismanaged American Institutions)'.

Introduction: It Is Time for Banks and other Perennial American Stalwart Institutions That are Considered to be Too Big Too Fail To Be Brought Back into the Real World!

The Federal government’s position, that it is cheaper to keep the failing institutions is a failed policy, and it is tantamount to domestic spousal abuse, with the American people being the spouse, and the Federal Government the abusing husband.

What we have been witnessing recently, given the irresponsibility of financial and other giant American institutions (the American corporatocracy), and the government's willingness to partner with them in crime, before and after the fact, is what I refer to as the American institutional conundrum of permitting a solvable problem to persist, as opposed to fixing rather than underwriting the problem.

I also think of it in terms of American corporate and governmental spousal abuse, the spouse being the American citizenry and the abuser being corporate America in bed with American government. Given the recent economic collapse of the worldwide, American led macroeconomic system, the phrase “too big too fail”, has entered into American parlance, if not the American lexicon.

And having said that, financial institutions are not the only institutions in the American system that fit the paradigm of being considered to be 'too big too fail'. In fact there are many other ones that fit into this category. A number of American institutions, since World War II, have grown to astronomical proportions.

Some have become so large and powerful, that the larger ones easily employ as many as 100,000 individuals or more. Going back to the colonial period, around the 17th and 19th centuries, today’s American corporations especially, remind me of those large seagoing organizations that were created and run by the British Empire. Names like the East India Company and the British India Company come to mind, and later the Atlantic and Pacific Tea companies.

These mammoth maritime organizations were so powerful, that they controlled the economies of other nations in practically every other continent in the world outside of Europe, as well as the seas. These organizations became the defacto governments of several nations that they occupied.

In America, the United States Federal Government, is the biggest employer of them all to include giants like IBM, Cisco, General Motors, Chrysler ...

Many of these organizations are clearly monopolies, and others like them frequently engage in monopolistic practices and indiscretions. And still, they manage, somehow, to skirt anti-trust and other laws that you, me and some other organizations are bound to abide by.

And that reminds me of one of the first things that I was told when I was transferred out to Washington DC several years ago, work which caused me to be involved with the Congress of the United States of America on an almost daily basis.

That the United States Congress typically exempts itself from the laws that it creates (that all other Americans and American institutions are obliged to follow).

Aside from Congress, these giant behemoth institutions, for the good that they do by employing a considerable number of Americans, wield considerable influence over the American political process, other American institutions and most of the major decisions that are made in this land.

Given that we are a consumer driven economy, the power of corporations determines, by and large, the buying habits of most consumers, domestic and foreign, and how much the average American can spend. Given the political wealth and geographical reach of these institutions, some are multi-national, with their wealth they can purchase as well as sell influence which controls the world-wide macroeconomic system.

It is not uncommon for corporations to get what they want from the American consumer or from federal, state and local governments. Consider the large insurance companies and their ability of late to prevent the pass of Single Payer insurance and the government option. The American people, 60% told our President and Congress what we wanted, and instead the insurance lobby, given its influence on Congress won out.

The majority of American voters wanted and still wants a public option to be put into place, an option for insurance buyers that would increase competition and provide an alternative for consumers against large insurance monopolies. A public option would also help to lower health-care costs. And given the dollars that they spent, Insurance Companies, and the influence that they wielded with our elected officials, the public option went by the wayside.

Many of these institutional giants employ corporate lobbyists to do their bidding for them. Most Americans are not aware that there are over 300,000registered lobbyists in America. And God only knows how many unregistered lobbyists, foreign and domestic, there are that influence the American political process, America’s power structures and official American domestic and foreign policy.

How many of you have ever been exposed to one of these registered or unregistered lobbyists. Given the ratio of lobbyists to American citizens, it would appear that each one of us would know or have come into contact with one or more of them at some point in our lifetimes. There are far more of them, a ratio of about 600 to 1, to each one of the individuals that we vote into Congress to represent us.

Many of these lobbyists have offices on “K” Street in Washington DC, just a stones throw from the White House, and just a short distance from Capitol Hill. They have more access and power over our representatives than the average American citizen does – truly, they are all in bed together.

Now given the large numbers of lobbyists and dollars that are retained by most corporate organizations, in comparison to the number of individuals who represent you and me in Washington DC, and the money that you and I can afford to spend - one can you understand why corporations get what they want. On the other hand, for the American people, it seems the other way around for instead, ‘the more things seem to change, the more they seem to remain the same. So much for a representative democracy then!

Someone once said of our government, 'it is the best that money can buy'!

It ought to be evident, by now, which institutions there are that are buying wholesale the American government. I tried to explain to a rather erudite friend, just a few months ago, that to be honest, the American people really do not have representatives in Washington. He couldn’t understand that. I explained it this way. Yes, you voted to place someone into office, but the person who has the ear of the person that you voted into office is not you. Too many of our officials are bought and sold by influence peddlers.

Now if you didn’t understand what I mean let me put it this way. The reason that you don’t have a Congressperson or Senator representing you in office, individuals that the American electorate vote in to office, is because in actuality, in all too many instances is because they are being controlled by corporate and foreign interests. The average American, cannot afford these goons, lobbyists, and instead believe that our votes are simply all that we need.

And as a result we are being abused by a system that can afford to pay them, with taxpayer money no less, the Federal Goverment. Our trusted politicians who are in bed with lobbyists and much of corporate America, have been retained/bought and sold by American corporations with their own parochial interests.

In addition to Federal lobbyist organizations, there are state lobbyists and State lobbying organizations. I was surprised to learn just the other day that the 3rd largest lobbying organization in my beloved home state of California is the Native American Lobbyist organizations.

To wit, the corporations and financial institutions get what they want and the American people never seem to get what we want no matter who we elect to office.. Here’s a thought, why don’t the American people simply form the American People’s Lobbyist Organization, then perhaps we can raise enough money to pay the politicians that we in good faith vote and have voted into office to do what we tell them to do?

What recently took place with domestic and other world-wide financial institutions, and in fact has been going on for some time now, reminds me a lot of what has historically taken place within another domestic American institution.

I am talking about the American family and spousal abuse that is typically being inflicted on the family by the alpha male!

Both the government, and many American institutions are guilty of nothing short of spousal abuse of the American people. The American people are the subordinate spouses who in many ways are married to the government and corporate and financial institutions, the institutions are behaving like abusive and controlling spouses!

There was a time, in our majoritarian society (women are now the current majority in America), when the male was considered the power-broker in the household. He earned the wages, was the sole bread winner in the household and therefore he wielded incredible power and influence over the family. In male-dominated households, both past and present, the wife and kids were solely dependent, as a rule, on the male financier, bread-winner and sustenance provider for a roof over their heads, food, energy coming in their domicile, clothing…

These males wielded so much power, that given the nature of the human animal, it didn’t take long (even though we have seen some improvement) for them to become monster power-brokers and tyrants within the household. Even today, many males still insist on wielding incredible power over their female spouses, just as American institutions along with the Fed are doing over the American people. When I was a young man coming up, I was taught one thing, primarily by male peers , and that was that with regard to females: My role was to ‘keep them in check”. Why? Because as the phrase goes that was often repeated between males, “I Was Da Man!”

Fortunately, I never bought into the, I Am Da Man Syndrome, I simply wanted to treat another person, be they male or female, in the same manner that I wanted to be treated, with dignity, grace and metal respect. And my understanding of how women felt, those that were historically being abused mentally, sexually or physically by males was confirmed. The late founder of the Women’s Liberation Movement, came and spoke at Stanford University several years ago. I had already read the Feminine Mystique, authored by Betty Friedan, founder of the Women's Liberation Movement, as well as some of the other women’s liberation books.

For example, in college I read tomes like: Sisterhood is Powerful, by Robin Morgan, 'My Secret Garden' by Nancy Friday ... And it was confirmed, what I knew already that most males were raised in the manner, just as many of our institutions have been conditioned to do, that is to become predators, tyrants, abusers and thieves.

Now there are some females that also fit this paradigm, consider Ann Coulter for example. I was watching a movie some years ago, I can’t remember the name of it, when one black male character was chided by his peers about his mom. Why? They said that his mom was so mean that he called his mom, ‘da man!Males or females, and on the other hand male dominated corporations can and typically are seen by most as 'da man'!

But on a more serious note, in spite of the abuse that often occurred and still occurs, an abuse of power that is a result of the power (concentrated in the hands of the few) that the male head of household enjoyed (females still earn only 80% of what a male earns for doing the same job in America, the institutions as it stood then was considered to be too big to fail. And as a result, even in those instances when authorities knew or were made aware that abuse, sexual or physical, was taking place in a particular family, they didn’t do anything about it.

Why? Because he was ‘da man’, and many of them (dominant males too), gave quiet acceptance in a male dominated way and society, because they were also living out the fantasy of being ‘da man’. To wit, everyone understood what being ‘da man meant’, even the victims. The latter understood, that ‘he’ earned the money and therefore he had an inherent right to wield power in the household and to be the boss. What was done about it initially? Not much.

The institution of the Church, and other religious organizations historically sanctioned male dominance, and in some instances cruelty and abuse, by the alpha male. Why? Because the scriptures implied that the female and the children were pretty much the property of the male. . And if there is one scripture that any male in America can quote, even if he does not attend church on a regular basis it is, “The Man Is The Head of The House.

Empowered, by the Government and sanctioned by the Church, other religious institutions and oftentimes the family itself (given that male dominance was part and parcel of the cultural ethos of most nations). Historically, males, much like our other American institutions, felt justified to do whatever they wanted with regard to their families, no matter how cruel or however exploitative their behavior was.

Here is an example, of egregious non-physical abuse. A decade ago I was in Lake Tahoe for a respite, when a young black male seemed to be giving me too much attention. I didn’t know what he was up to. Well, it turned out that he was not up to anything nefarious, he simply had a problem. He got off work earlier that evening, he was employed in Lake Tahoe, he cashed his check before going home and along with a pocket full of money drove straight over to the Casino.

Why? He felt lucky. Since he was ‘da man, and the money was his (forget the wife and kids at home) he made the decision on his own. I must have looked like someone who cared, because as in this situation, people have always come up to me to tell me about their problems and to seek solace (without knowing that I am a cleric being been one for about 30 years now). In fact, a former dentist of mine surprised me one day when he proclaimed, ‘you are not like other people, you actually listen to what people have to say’.

At the time I felt that his proposition was overstated, but I soon realized through cursory observation that most people that I know never permit you to complete a sentence, before they launch into a tirade – in other words, they listened only to the extent that they had to, often impolite, in order to respond with what they wanted to talk about. In other words, I’m not really listening, but waiting for you to finish so that I can talk about what I want to talk about.

Based on my anecdotal observations I concluded that most people feign interest in what the other is saying only so they can respond and tell you about their lives or problems. Well, that night I played my role and listened, as I typically have done.

The young husband explained that he had gambled away all of his family’s weekly earnings in just a few short hours. The paycheck that was to be used to purchase food, pay the rent and sustain his wife and child until he earned the next paycheck was gone. Not a single bottle of milk, groceries …., would be purchased with the sole weekly household check. Like today’s American financial institutions, this hubby controlled the money, and could do whatever he wanted to do with it, without regard to his wife and kids, just as it appears in the case of banks and other American financial institutions and corporations.

Back to the young hubby, he added, I am talking to you because I can’t go home. I asked, well are you simply going to stay out all night. He responded, “I can’t go home”. He must not have been ‘da man at his house’, for most men in his situation would have gone home anyway, and proclaimed, I am ‘da man’, and even if I lost the weekly wages to gambling, it was my money! Poor wife and kids I thought, she’s at home awaiting his arrival, and I know what she doesn’t know, that he has spent this week's paycheck and they are broke!

Why was and is this kind of systematic understanding allowed to persist? It was permitted because the male was the sole wager earner, and if the powers that be were to intervene, they would likely have to take responsibility for the welfare of wife and kids. And don’t forget that years ago, the average American family was much larger than it is now. Heaven forbid, if the taxpayers would have to assume responsibility. Does anyone remember the lyrics of a song, ‘it is cheaper to keep her’. The point of the song was that for the man who was thinking about divorcing his wife, and then pays alimony, it was simply cheaper to keep her and to go out and cheat on her.

The position of the government, and the rest of the cultural position appeared to be that it was simply cheaper to permit the wage-earner spouse to simply beat her up or deprive her, than heaven help, they would have to step in and do something about spousal abuse or neglect. Or as some were often heard to say, the Federal Government would have to provide relief if it did not support a dominant male wage earner in the household.

In despair and usually to no avail, the wife, if not the kids would cry out to whomever would listen, often begging for help, and explaining that 'the old man' was abusing the money, drinking, gambling, womanizing …, and not taking care of the responsibility of the house. Sadly, their pleadings seemed like rants that summarily fell upon deaf ears.

Where could the wife go, to explain the plight of her and the children who needed adequate food, clothing and shoes, in order to seek relief? Where could she go to seek redress in a system that permitted the male wage-earner, at times the only person in the household with the right to vote and could be heard in a court hearing, to seek relief.

Oftentimes, there was simply no place to go. And add to that, what if the neglectful head of household, who believed as I have heard some male, 'heads of house', "the money is my money", decided to spend the family's wages in a profligate manner on booze, women, gambling...? What could the wife advocate do?

And just as the system operated at that time, when government officials, were only interested in what the male wage earner and voter would have to say, we have just witnessed something similar taking place, all over again in America. And this time, it is not only the wife and kids that have been affected, it is the majority of Americans, regardless of gender, age or position in life that have been and are being affected.

What we are experiencing with our institutions today, reminds me a lot of the days of the “I am da man, because I earn all da money syndrome".

But it is not a single person that is buttressing this proposition, it is the institutions that the American citizens have so long come to trust that are doing so, and they are being buttressed by the American government, that is complicitous with them in their misdeeds.

In other words, our financial institutions have become our draconian spouses in this sense; financial institutions harbor the wealth of the nation, and along with the government they make financial and other policy decisions that ultimately determine how the wealth will be taxed or spent. In the end, the impact is felt by the family or individual wage earner. The opinion of the American people does not matter, given that the financial institutions don’t listen to us, even though it is the job of our regulators to hold their feet to the fire. Instead, our regulators are all in bed, it would appear, with them.

Just consider Bernie Madoff as an example, a personal friend of many individuals at the Securities and Exchange Commission. How long did it take to bring Bernie to justice? He was financially abusing many American investors who had bought into his fund. And too boot, he was doing so right under the noses of the regulators that were supposed to keep them in line.

His partners in crime were too willing to look the other way. The abuse went on for years. The government often stands by and supports the abuser, because in the mind of the government officials, these institutions are simply too big too fail, and if they were to fail, who is going to pick up the slap.

And it is but sad that at the same time, we were made to be fully dependent on these exclusive but abusive institutions in order to save money, purchase practically any large ticket item or for a bail-out. When things get tight for the average consumer, and it is fully up to their discretion to deny us or approve our requests for a loan, even though they use our deposits daily in order to engage in questionable and risky practices. What a life for them?

If only the young man that I met in Tahoe had such an arrangement, one in which he could lose his whole paycheck in the early evening, and be bailed out by the Federal Government before he got home that night to face, I’m sure, a very dejected, bewildered and unhappy woman.

Well, at the very least, there wasn’t going to be any ‘kissy-face’ for him that night, and a man lives for a little kissy-face when he comes home.

Again, just as many a wife and child, usually a daughter, caved into financial, physical and sexual abuse from an all powerful, wage earning male at the time (with the full backing of the American government in order to have a roof over their heads, clothing, heat, food on the table … because of what his very presence in the house represented), oftentimes as a female and child predator experienced, now every most every American occupies the same station in life.

Except now, most Americans are not being abused by dad or a wayward spouse, they are being abused by American institutions with the full support of the American government.

This is what happens, when everyone is forced to be dependent on someone else for their livelihood, or another institution that garners power, in order to survive. This is not a good practice. Perhaps we could all demand our share of the American wealth back from the Federal Reserve. In other words, head on down to Ft. Knox, garner and give me my share of the gold. What is that you say, the American currency is no longer backed up by gold at Fort Worth? We went off the gold-standard, when?

Where is our share of the wealth, that would give us a say so or a right to self-determination being held? They told us to put the wealth, little or big, in their hands, banks and other financial institutions. And doesn’t this make it much easier for abuse to take place within our financial institution, when factually, the majority of American wealth now exists only as a (phenomenon) in cyberspace. Show me the money, where is the money?

This begs the question, why are the majority (in a majoritarian nation), being ruled and victimized by a small minority? In other words, why are we doing what former American-family members and some are still doing today, by enduring this abusive and exploitive relationship with other financial institutions. ?

Should any individual or institution have so much power, that whether they are abusive or not, corrupt or not, or mismanaging the affairs of everyone that depends upon them for survival be placed above the law? Who can you trust?

And just as all of us know how long sexual and physical abuse has existed, if not neglect in families all over the world. today, the American people realize, more and more that they are the victims of institutional/domestic abuse. Just consider the word therapist as an example. The therapist can oftentimes be thought of as 'the rapist', for he or she often engages in the mental rape of their clients, given the trust that is implied in the client therapist relation.

Americans more and more are being subjected to corporate domestic abuse and exploitation by its myriad of monopolistic national institutions and its government that is sworn to protect them. A phenomenon that is carried on with the full blessings of the American government, regardless apparently of which administration is in power.

Again, some of them employing 10's of thousands of individuals, managing huge and incalculable portfolios .., these organizations are today’s abusive institutional husbands and fathers of the American people. I never dreamed that I would be agree with the Tea Party on any topic, however and whatever their true motive happens to be, and it remains suspect, they have a point when it comes to the bailout by the government of these so-called, too big too fail institutions.

Peace & Grace

The Mark(et) of the Beast: The American-styled Beast & Bear Mark(et) System

An addenda: To my prior writing on the Mark of the Beast.

Some say that there is 'no riddle', as far as the Universe and everything that is contained within it is concerned. The ones who hold to this belief, are referring to those individuals and organizations, typically religious individuals or religious organizations, who hold that there is no ultimate plan, destiny, question to be answered or response that needs to be made to some unseen force or question that has been in force since and before the origin of the Universe.

In other words what matters to them is that we are here, however we got here (whether by chance through evolution) and that we should simply behave in the manner that King Solomon wrote about in the book of Ecclesiastes:

Solomon wrote that we should simply "... eat, drink and be merry for tomorrow we will die...".

The implication drawn from that is that there is nothing else that will take place afterwards that we should be concerned about or that should be permitted to influence our thinking during our individual sojourns on earth.

In other words, those who believe this way hold that there won't be any consequences in the Universal scheme of things, for whatever we do here on earth, according to their existential thought-patterns there won't be a reconstituted life ... or any consequences for how any one of us has conducted himself while on earth. Or to put it another way, this is all that there is, and, ‘tomorrow we die’!

Still there are others who sense or want to believe (even outside of religion and any other religious or literal influences), that there is evidently something more going on here than some chance happening, or that there is some unqualified universe or universal experiences that go along with our being here in the Universe, even if we happened to of evolved (as a result of theistic evolution or otherwise) or as a result of Big Bang ...

Even if I had not been raised in the church to believe ..., I believe that there is something else in existence besides my own intellect or rational sense of what is.

And as television character "Mr. T", wouldn't often say, "I PITY THE FOOL WHO WOULD TRY TO TELL ME DIFFERENTLY"

When I take into consideration the eschatological leap, though clearly not an exact science itself, I lean towards those groups and individuals who believe that there is something else that ultimately drives the universe, even though I suspect that the conclusions that have been drawn by all religious organizations, even the Christian organization that I happen to be a part of leave a whole lot to be desired.

Would I believe the same way, if I happened to have been born in another nation and happened to be a Muslim, a Sikh, a Hindu, a Jew ..., I suspect so! Do any of the religious groups have a monopoly on truth, well of course they do, just ask them!

If there is one thing that religion has taught me, it is to be a skeptic of dogmatism, whether it is religious or secular dogmatism, and to be skeptical of dogmatic individuals and teachers who have an incendiary tendency or incentive to speak in absolute terms. I love that saying that, there are no absolutes, "not even the absolute that was just stated", for too much of what we believe to be true is based upon historical human social constructs.

In a previous writing I went into more detail about a topic that bible eschatologists often write about, the Mark of the Beast, in particular, what John saw in his vision on the isle of Patmos that he referred to as ‘the Mark, and its is the meaning? Could it be true, as some eschatologist believe, that if ancient prophecies of the time were accurate, that all of what has been written before has already taken place, which is in symbolic terms, the world as they knew it came to a catastrophic. Eschatological historicists believe that such is in fact the case.

Clearly, a lot of what has been written, appears to have come true already. On the other hand, if you believe in 3 tenses of prophecy, local, ultimate and universal prophecy, then certain the elements of certain prophecies could occur over and over and again in different timeframe. How much of what was saw through a vision or otherwise, have been the result of an overactive imagination? Sacrilege, no I don’t think so. What is important from my viewpoint, is to seek what is real, and oftentimes, we as human beings make mistakes!

Having said that, in my view, one would be foolish, I suspect, not to ask, is there really some unseen force, religion aside, that is omniscient or even 'non-omniscient' that had the ability to foretell or leak discretionary various clues about the Universe as we stumble along in it. Some folks deny reality because they simply have an issue with religion. I believe that you can have an issue with religion and with religious teachers, but just because you do, as the saying goes, ‘don‘t throw the baby out with the bath water’. All religions that I know and have read about certainly contain some elements of truth.

Should we follow the beliefs of those reductionists who often say that we should simply ignore, evidences or clues to the contrary, that were previously foretold - particularly when they seemed to have come true: the ones who conclude that these are mere coincidences. How does one ignore a dream, precognitive or prodronal that comes true? Should we do as some have done already, simply refer to what they cannot explain as nonsense. If we were to do that, then we will be upholding these so-called rationalists who make comments that have no basis in fact, just as they vilify individuals and groups who do not see things in the manner that they do.

Is there some unseen spirit or force that creates and drives the universe, (who or that has created and predetermined or predestined our destinies as humans, in addition to the earth and the Universe: My answer to that question is, I emphatically believe that there is something, a God, a Singularity, A Unifying Principle or a God equivalent that exists along with chance, in other words non-determined outcomes.

As an example, King Solomon wrote about the impact that time and chance has on all of our lives. So forgive my highly esoteric and ethereal ramblings, however, reductionism is not the answer either. We must speculate, we must examine, we must consider, even when our cogitations, speculations, ramblings ..., take us beyond the parameters that have been prescribed to us by certain doctrinaire teachers, religious and non. Why? Each one of us is an individual, and we should never relegate the responsibility for our lives and the choices that we make to some other fallible even when well-intentioned human being(s) or group(s).

Now back to the American-Styled Market System and John's vision on the Isle of Patmos. Engaging in a play on words, could our American consumer driver Mark(et) system be a form of the beast that John wrote about in the book of Revelations, although he apparently only saw the symbols of what the beast actually happens to be? Certainly, our Market System, wall street, stocks, trading, ticker symbols, the two beats (bear and bull) , please see my previous writing on this where I go into more detail. Our system, being emulated now by much of the world), seems to have all of the components of a numerical system that one has to be a part of in order progress.

Again, is it possible that the symbols that he saw looked like or were representative beastly symbols, our Bear and the Bull, that are used to describe the upswing and the downswing of the American Stock Market, when the beast's head is bowed closed to the ground, or the bull, whose head is riding high up to symbol the upward volatility in the Market. We refer to the market in these terms on alternating days as a Bull Market, when the head is high, and a Bear Market, when the head is sloping near to the ground.

Here is something else curious that no one else that I've heard talk about, the number 666 and the total number of the books of the Canon 66! What do these digits have to do with each other, the Mark has 3 sixes, and yet the Christian canon contains 66 books. What is this number and what does it mean? Has anyone else ever considered the interestingly parallel between the number of the beast and the total number of books that represent the bible. Consider this, the number of the books of the bible (66), and if you add 1 more numeral 6, you end up with (666). Now religious folks, especially Christians, before you break out our commentaries and seek to blast me back into oblivion, all you can really tell me is what you believe and why, something that is typically based upon your understanding of something that you have concluded or have been taught.

But open up a little bit and consider what does this kind of symmetry or dualism between the two opposites, heaven and hell, and the number of the book and closeness between the number of Constantine’s canon have in common

Does it have any meaning? Is it worth examining. Some will say no, and that's okay. But I think it’s worth examining, what one more 6 added to the sum total of the books of the Christian Bible could mean or explain or explain about this historical eschatological mystery. Or, what could the numbers if anything have to do with what, to me, appear to have to do with the American-styled Mark(et) of the Beast system that is being emulated by most emerging national economies around the world today.

What of the American-style macroeconomic, finance, credit, credit default swaps, trade, stock exchanges, tickers, (to include the New York and other stock exchanges of the world)? What could a prophecy like this mean if we considered the prophecy itself in a non-linear or multi-dimensional universe – one that is not limited to 3-dimensional aspects and therefore 3-dimensional understanding. Move over Nostradamus.

Uh oh you’re thinking, and with respect to all of this, you say, the Reverend has truly gone off of the deep end this time. No, I don't think so, in fact I always remember the words of the late Assistant Prelate of the AOH Churches of God, Bishop Harris, formerly of Chicago Illinois, when he said, "I suppose that my opinion is just as good as anybody Elise's". I suspect that my "informed opinions and speculations" are just as good as the demagoguery of our biblical literalists, modern preachers and translators. Or don't I reserve the right to speculate? If you ask some of them, the answer would be no!

The Apostle Paul, in his writings, particularly to the Church at Thessalonica wrote, 'prove all things and hold fast to those which are good'. I am simply testing the veracity of statements in order to determine whether or not the conclusions of some of our former interpreters stand up under scrutiny. Now keep in mind that with respect to what is actual scripture, which decides for some what is and what is not true, Chief Apostle Peter, the Chief Apostle made a distinction in 1 Peter 2:15 between 'the writings of Paul', and 'the scriptures.

I agree with the Chief Apostle that Paul's writings, were not scripture! Now I understand that that many of my friends in the ministry still teach that the bible is the literal word of God, despite all of the evidences to the contrary. And many of the same believe that however they interpret the Bible, that what they conclude is in fact literal truth. And of course it would have to be the unadulterated truth, because if their interpretations was not infallible, than that would mean that they were in fact teachers of falsehoods.

On the other hand and as I see it, what is wrong with admitting that you have made a mistake from time to time? Why should we? The answer is because if there is a second pillar to the Christian faith, if not the first, isn't it simply put that humans, even Christian ones, make mistakes - and that is acceptable with God?

I have always been more interested in getting at what is real, or truthful, if you will, as opposed to following some talking-head who believes that the way that he sees things is the truth and that there can be no other truth.

Wouldn't it be more preferable for one to say, "this is the way that I understand or interpret what I have read"? The late Presiding Prelate of the Pentecostal Assemblies of the World, encouraged his ministers to do just that. Do what? he said, that they should say, "that this is what I believe", when referring to certain texts.

For after all preachers, we were not present when these texts were written nor translated, and therefore we have no idea what the authors truly meant.

The next thing you know you will hear some well-meaning person saying that Ronald Reagan (not hard to believe) was, or that incumbent President Obama Hussein, one or the other, is the Mark of the Beast. Keynes, Galbraith, do you suppose that either of these infamous economists are posthumously turning over in their graves, having heard that someone is intimating that the system that they wrote so much about could have been the evil that was described in John's astro-laden vision?

What is good, and what is bad about the American-styled macroeconomic system? And if the American styled market economic system is The Mark, what does that make the holders of its stock? Finally, Bear Market or Bull Market, which beast is it?
to be continued ..., When I write, as I am doing now, I permit my thoughts to pour out onto the page and later, perhaps you have noticed that before. Afterwards, I go back in and make grammatical and other punctuation errors - I gotta go, but I will be back - THIS IS A LIVING DOCUMENT!

But before I go, I must emphasize again that not everything that Paul wrote was considered scripture by the other Apostles, as many Christians are being taught to believe today. He would even be surprised, I suspect, if he were to return only to learn that 'his writings' had been elevated to the status of scripture.

In other words, when it comes to the Christian Bible (and any other religious text), although we appreciate the writings of the writers, t here is room for interpretation folks - many times wrote from his own heart, and I suspect that he made mistakes, just as he did on the Road to Damascus when punishing the wrong people, in spite of his purpose for writing. !

What Peter wrote about:2 Peter 3:15. Bear in mind that our Lord's patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.

The Apostles did not always understand what the other was writing, saying or doing, neither were they always in agreement about what the other did, consider Paul and his instructions to the Gentile Christians, which differed from what James, head of the Jerusalem church, had taught the Jews.

We need to consider more than what some individuals in the past had to say was the was the absolute truth. The author may have believed that what he wrote, was the absolute truth, however, that does not mean that what he wrote was 'the absolute truth!

On the other hand, the other side needs to consider that some of what has been written down in religious texts or taught by religious teachers has some validity and a basis in truth. Today, I have challenged you to think. Most of us who were raised in intolerant religious organization should beware of dogmatism, for we were raised in institutions that taught that us that we were neither to question, test nor to!

Rev. C. Solomon

The Revolution Won't Be Televised After All: Obama killed it!

Subtitle: He Was The Wrong Person For The Time

To those black Americans who said that the Obama candidacy was a matter of destiny, and if he was not elected in 2008, that another black would never be elected President of the United States - you were correct in this regard.

We will likely never see an elected black President again, even if she or he is competent, capable and qualified to do the job, given the numerous failures of our current nascent and incumbent lame-duck President, Barack Obama.

Folks, the Obama candidacy was a matter of political expediency given the incompetence and ineptitude of the previous Bush Administration. The American voters were frustrated with the outgoing administration to the extent that they would have elected Lassie if he were alive and running for President in 2008. We will likely see a reprise of the 2008 election in 2012, however, the bumbling Obama Administration will likely be tossed out of office and replaced by Republican ideologues.

Other than for Mr. Obama's big ego which caused him to believe that he should leapfrog over more qualified and competent candidates who had paid their dues and prepared themselves to be President in 2008, he would have taken more time to prepare to run for the office of president of the United States in let's say 2012 or 2016. And now what do we have? Well let's just say that we have more of the same, a country that is starving for competent leadership at the top. His cabinet is one of the weakest in recent history; certainly a golden opportunity has been lost.

Obama's supporters here and around the world are shocked at his quick turnaround particularly as it relates to the Obama Administration's foreign policy. The latter mirrors that of the previous Bush administration despite all of Mr. Obama's promises to the contrary, during the run up to the election. He promised to lead the revolution and to bring about positive social change; instead he proved that he wasn't really any different from any other politician.

Oh I know what you're thinking; Solomon is just another brother who lacks the respect for another brother or sister who has succeeded where he has not. Au contraire my nitwitted friends, I have done quite well for myself, including my years spent in Washington DC, so don't worry about me - I know firsthand how the Washington DC establishment, including congress, works.

And, as I explained to many of Obama's supporters before the election, I considered the line of distinguished blacks who preceded the nascent Senator and now President from Illinois, going back to William Frederick Douglas, W.E.B. DuBois, Booker T. Washington, Martin Luther King ... clearly there has been a considerable drop off in terms of quality, experience and skill with Mr. Obama.

Besides, when questioned about how he wanted blacks to view him and his candidacy during the run up to the election, he said that the blacks should vet him just as they would any other candidate.

I did, and I don't apologize for doing so!

Would he have made a great leader someday? I suppose that the answer would be yes, particularly, if we would have taken the time to prepare himself and to be mentored by someone who knew and could teach him the ropes. Frankly, I blame those voters who supported this young inexperienced neophyte, a man who has been waffling and recapitulating all over American domestic and foreign policy since and before his presidential inauguration, more than I do Obama.

The voters behaved as the Republicans did in 2000, when they voted George Bush Jr. into office just about a decade ago. In this case both sides appeared to have got what they wanted in the short-run, change. But was the change a change for good? Apparently not, for similar to what oftentimes occurs with our children who periodically believe that they are prepared to take on more than they are capable of doing during certain periods of their lives, the adults in this case - the American voters should have said,

"Senator Obama you are definitely on the radar for the future, but for now go and continue to prepare yourself a bit more for the task of being President and leading a Revolution", for one speech at a Democratic Convention does not a president make.

Instead, the voters, including the 'I am for the Iraq war, and now I am against the war democratic voters' behaved as children themselves, as they did before when they switched their votes from Senator Hillary Clinton to Senator Obama in the Primaries. Why? Because they misgauged Obama wins in several state caucuses, and because of an endorsement from the late Senator Ted Kennedy (his former seat now in the hands of Republicans may be a portent of the future). By the way thanks Oprah, you had a major role in this travesty yourself!

If I had the time, I would write about how this one man, Mr. Obama, put an end to a revolution, and I would write about how he did it in world record time. Mr. Obama was what the Republicans needed to derail the revolution, and he played right into their hands (the good campaigner but poor visionary and strategician that he was).

In the King James Version of the Bible, chapter 7 and verse 8, Solomon wrote that "The end of a thing is better than the beginning"!

So in your mind you're thinking, then are you speaking out too quickly Reverend Solomon since he still has approximately 3 more years to turn things around.

No, I don't think so because in actuality one 'end' has already been achieved. Think of it this way, his run for the office represented 'the beginning', and it was the means to 'an end' that was fulfilled the day that he was he was elected and installed into office as President of the United States.

When you juxtapose Mr. Obama's nearly 2 year run for the office, and what took place when he began to occupy the office of the President, he reached a benchmark. Nothing will ever change the fact, that he was elected President of the United States and shortly after brought the Revolution of 2008, that was bigger than his ego, to an abrupt end.

Having said that, I wish him well, and hopefully he will succeed and turn out to be a good President after all. However, even if he learns and does turn out to be a good President in the final analysis, it will not alter the fact that he was the wrong person to lead the American Revolution of 2008, a revolution which he has summarily destroyed.

Just think about it again, it was less than two years ago, following the 8-year sadistic antics of a failed and unprepared President George Bush Jr., who along with the neo-conservative Bushtanista Party put most Americans, America's allies and many nations of the world off for good.

My God, even Republican Americans said, 'no mas' to George Bush Junior and his Bushtanista Party inner-circle before his 2nd term in office was completed!

A groundswell of supporters at that time demanded change in America, and it appeared that they organized a majority (of voters) to accomplish their objectives.

Even individuals in other nations, including America's Allies mostly supported 'the dump the Bushtanistas Revolution', making the American revolution a world-wide phenomenon.

And the Revolution succeeded right up to the day that the world and the majority of Americans got what they wanted, President Obama elected as the 44th President of the United States of America. It would appear that the objective was achieved, the Revolution was on track and America and the world were about to experience a notable change.

Even the Nobel Peace Prize Committee thought so, and they prematurely awarded President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize given all of the peaceful rhetoric he espoused, leading up to the election, as he gave stump speeches around the world. And based on his previous rhetoric coupled with his many campaign promises, the world also felt assured that he was going to set the world on a peaceful course. Nyat, he fooled them too!

And what did the young neophyte President do instead, afterwards? He not only single-handedly destroyed the momentum and the energy of the revolution; he also destroyed the revolution itself. Yesterday, while I was at church discussing this matter with a fellow parishioner who listened to my position regarding Mr. Obama's having destroyed the revolution; she blamed whatever failures there were with the Obama Administration on the Republicans. Naive?

Folks, in spite of the fact that Mr. Obama and his supporting cast had a mandate, a filibuster proof Senate and an overwhelming majority in the House, not to overlook the fact that soon afterward he received a Nobel Peace Prize which symbolized world-wide support of his articulated positions before he became President (his candidacy and the revolution), the capitulator as he often did during his run for the office continued waffling.

Even his supporters that he made campaign promises to, not the Republicans, began complaining. They began to wonder exactly which side this man was on shortly after the election. Even former Vice President Cheney and company loved and have recently applauded his foreign policy change of heart, particularly with respect to his change of position regarding the war in Iraq and his most recent position in the Middle-East.

And add to that, other former Obama critics who complained before when it was announced that he would receive the Nobel Peace Prize were jubilant when he changed course and gave his, 'Historical American Hegemony Was and Is Honorable Speech', at the Noble Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo Norway!

The gist of his speech at Oslo, as he scolded his former trenchant supporters and sycophants, was that 'Historical World-wide American Fascism Has Always Been Proper'. The latter implied that both he, his base and the world that supported him had been wrong all along during the run up to the election in 2008.

My God, the man turned his back on the revolution that he was the poster child for just over a year ago. Not only that, he also turned his back on the individuals who supported his previously held position when he ran for office.

And Cheney replied in the aftermath of the speech at Oslo with an, 'aye aye matey great speech' endorsement! Can you think of a revolution that ever ended so abruptly? I can't think of one offhand, for neither the Sandinista nor Bushtanista Revolution fizzled out so quickly - the George Bush Revolution lasted for approximately 7-years. On the other hand there was the Ross Perot Revolution wasn't there? It ended in the middle of the night and most supporters awakened to find out that Ross had abandoned ship. I forgot that one!

But back to Obama, the leader of the fizzled out Revolution of 2008. And what of those followers and supporters (in and around the world) who were duped into believing that he could lead a world-wide revolution and help to bring about change, the ones who voted for him, believing that he could lead the world towards good?
Well, from what I have read, mostly everyone everywhere seems to be in shock, except for me of course and a few Obama stalwarts who are simply unwilling to admit that they were wrong.

Some have said that they voted for Senator Obama only because he was a better choice than Senator McCain. They still don't get it and refuse to admit that Senator Obama was not the right choice to run against Senator McCain, for even if he was able to defeat Senator McCain, what we needed was a finisher, and it does not appear that he is a finisher at all.

I predicted all along that President Obama would be as weak a President as our other former hero President of South Africa had been. Nelson Mandela, mostly everyone's hero, served in a 95% majority black South Africa for 2-terms and during that time the revolution that he led fizzled out as well.

In fact his successor, President Mbeki, lacked the potency and the fervor of the South African Revolution, which is imbued in those Africans who remain a part of the South African permanent underclass to this day (despite the inaugurations of 2 black presidents of South Africa). He resigned in frustration, before completing his 2-term presidency. So what went wrong in these two nations did you ask?

The fact of the matter is that people all over the word love populist candidates. Most of them are skillful orators, and that is about all that they are. They can rally a crowd at the drop of the hat, and each of them seems to have the gift of knowing how to push people's buttons. It is this group of political cheerleaders who are so adept at stirring up the crowds. But typically that is all that they are good at, for conversely they are never skilled enough to quarterback the game (and at this juncture Obama does not seem to be an exception to the rule).

On the other hand good leaders, not the churlish and presumptuous crowd-pleasing band leaders that most people will rally to and coronate at the drop of a hat seldom get voted into office. The latter often discover that is difficult to get elected, because the people often prefer cheerleaders like a Ronald Reagan, Obama Hussein, George Bush Jr. or Sarah Palin (the latter both having been cheerleaders before at their alma maters). Besides, who needs a sound, seasoned, just and prepared statesperson to be in charge?

Frankly, Americans have had a history of placing incompetents into the highest office in the land, for over the past 3 decades, going back to Ronald Reagan. And it turns out that he was a cause célèbre according to the individuals who benefited from his inane, divisive, leveraged buyout-green mail, trickle down, and warmonger policies.

And not to be outdone by his failed presidency, soon afterward, the American voters treated us to the likes of not ready for prime-time President George Bush Jr. and Vice President Dan Quayle. These two men carry the distinctive honors of, in recent time, being the most incompetent presidential and vice presidential team that the United States has ever known that of former high school cheerleader George Bush Junior and his functionally illiterate side-kick.

Everyone who was a part of this coterie of failed leadership came out of the Republican Party, a party that boasts that it has given America more presidents than the Democrats have over the past 30 years. Yes, but what kind of presidents did the Republicans give us and has anyone noticed that the decline of America runs parallel with these 'poor excuses for presidential leadership' that was provided by the Republican or better yet the Repugnant Party?

And not to be outdone, in more recent times, we have been treated to the Obama Presidency which could have just have easily been the John McCain and unprepared Sarah Palin co-regency. I wouldn't have voted for John McCain anyway, simply because I don't believe in his policies, however, I really don't consider him to be incompetent.

But his running mate Sarah Palin, come on now? Her own handlers have admitted in the aftermath of the 2008 Campaign, that she was totally unprepared for the office. But that did not stop millions of American from voting for Sarah (the former cheerleader).

It is too bad that Obama supporters behaved in the same manner as their counterparts did by placing this untested man prematurely into the highest office in the land.

Do you see my point, that when it comes to the American voter (aside from the 40 to 50% who fail to vote anyway), the other half should consider taking a course somewhere - let's call it voting 101, that will teach them about the nuances of voting. Why?

American voters really don't know very much about revolutions or the electoral process for that matter. They only know what they hear from the American propaganda machine, sycophants and talking heads, the latter often use scare tactics. Another thing, the closest thing that most Americans have ever witnessed or known about, when it comes to a revolution, was the one that took place in the turbulent 60’s that came to be known as the Civil Rights Movement, which was a modern-day American Revolution.

And what did my cohort, the Reverend Billy Graham confess some years ago about that revolution that makes my point about what Americans know about Revolution? He concluded, at the time, that Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and his supporters, mostly members of America's permanent underclass were the real troublemakers.

Not even Evangelist Billy Graham had a harsh word to say about America's true oppressors or its inane and unjust laws. Out of that revolution monumental attempts were made to restructure our society, given all of the programs of the Great Society that followed tear gas, police dogs, sit-ins, beat-downs and live-ins.

The question that the coalition of voters who came together to support the Obama Revolution should ask themselves is what really went wrong? The answer to what went wrong was not that a group of individuals from all colors, stripes and political persuasions stood up in one voice and demanded change.

What in fact went wrong was that the voters permitted their emotions to overtake sound judgment. Mr. Obama simply put was the wrong person to lead the revolution. He has proved that already, for when the pressure began, he wilted and the Revolution has since apparently fallen apart. It reminds you of the pressure that he experienced during the Primaries when be abandoned his pastor and church of 25 years ...

So now that we have gone through this experience together, what can we likely expect to take place in 2012 general election, particularly, when many members of the coalition have already bolted, including Independent Voters, and others are following suit? Fickle voters? The fact of the matter is that of late, I haven't heard of anyone singing 'Happy Days Are Here Again' since the inauguration.

If you were to ask the average American Voter whether or not she or he were happy, you would likely get a response that goes something like this, "DO I LOOK HAPPY"?In 2012, it is very likely that we will witness yet another talking-headed neophyte being placed into office, one who will swing the pendulum all of the way back to the conservative right: Bobby Jindal from Louisiana perhaps? But let's hope not!

Yes folks, it will be the Republicans turn the next time around. Look for a conservative ideologue to take over, if the ones who are responsible for the Obama candidacy do not come together and find a solution before it is too late. Is Obama the solution? Frankly, similar to his predecessor, George Bush Jr., he certainly does not care about the will of the majority of the people either, which makes him in my mind 'no different than GB his predecessor.

The coalition should keep in mind that it was President Obama who failed to keep his promises, and to lead the people's revolution that he pretended to support. It was not the coalition that failed, other than making him the leader of 'their cause', one which he was not prepared to lead.

If the coalition does not come up with a solution, the next Republican ideologue who will likely spring from the Republican Tea Party will be grossly unprepared, and the rest of us will remain in the same boat that we have been in for nearly the past 30 years (the Clinton years being the exception) that of a headless country without a true leader. Where is the angst? We cannot permit the fire to go out!

In summary, even some of my very erudite and politically savvy and caring friends blew it this last time, albeit they are finding it hard to admit. I, on the other hand wrote in the candidate who did her homework and prepared herself to be President of the United States prior to 2008. I am so proud of her for refusing to seek the office of President, despite the pressure that she was under to do so shortly after she became the junior Senator from the State of New York.

Our current President did just the opposite, a few years ago, when he prematurely bolted from the United States Senate to toss his hat into the presidential ring.

Instead, Senator Clinton waited, completed the job that she committed to doing in New York. And she was, thereafter, tested in the crucible of American politics where she distinguished herself even more. In fact, she won the respect of her critics including her would be presidential opponent in the primaries. And as a result, now she is even more skilled and polished than she was before when she could have jumped the gun and ran for President nearly a decade ago.

In fact she, Senator Hillary Clinton, was more prepared then than President Obama is prepared to be President of the United States now, and he is the President of the United States now. How ironic! Chauvinism, misogyny, which one was it that derailed Senator Clinton in spite of her historical and proven track record of fighting for social justice for the American people, take your pick?

By contrast Senator Obama, had he not jumped ship at the same juncture in his career, to run for the office, having learned nothing yet, at the time, about being a United States Senator - he would have been much further along and would have likely garnered the respect of his Congressional peers.

A prime example of what could have been has been evident in the prolonged Health Care Reform Bill activity that has been going on in Congress. Perhaps if had waited and proven himself in the Senate, just as now Secretary of State Clinton did, he might have garnered the respect of his Congressional peers. And with the newly gained respect of his friends and foes alike on both sides of the aisle, there is a chance that a stronger version of the Health Care Reform Bill would have already been signed into law by the President.

It was a certainty among most voters, agree with her politics or not, that in 2008 Senator Clinton was prepared to preside over this nation and to see the revolution through to the end. And, she earned the right to lead the revolution that she has been fighting for all of her political career and she would have finished the job.

And you know what, unlike many of the individuals who jumped on the Obama bandwagon, I feel pretty darn confident about the person that I wrote in for president of the United States, Senator Clinton, in the 2008 General Election. And since that time she has distinguished herself even more as Secretary of State. And as a result she has added another arrow to her quiver, while at the same time, the Obama mystique continues to fade.

Who was it that stood up to the Republicans years ago with respect to 'the vast Right-Winged Conspiracy’ that in fact existed then and still exists today? It was Senator Hillary Clinton. Now when will the man who had a mandate to stand up to the vast Right-winged conspiracy, follow suit? Er herm, don't count on it!

To wit, even during the 2008 Election, current Vice President Joe Biden and Senator Hillary Clinton's former opponent during the primaries, Senator John McCain, acknowledged that she was more than qualified to be president of the United States. On the other hand, he, Senator John McCain, did not share a similar opinion about his challenger, Senator Obama's, ability to preside over this nation. He felt that he lacked the experience to run for the office at the time

Subsequently, current Vice President Joe Biden confessed that she, Senator Clinton, was more qualified to be vice president than he was, even though he had served for a longer time in the United States Senate, going all the way back to and before the Justice Thomas confirmation hearing.

Sadly, we have all witnessed another chance for positive social change to occur in America, and that opportunity has dwindled away given the person that we rejected (Secretary of State Hilary Clinton) for rock star Barak Obama Hussein. Now it is my hope that that the cause won't die out even though the momentum has seemingly been destroyed and the air has been let out of the sails (given the public's wrongful selection of the not quite ready for prime-time youthful Senator from the state of Illinois).

I will always remember what the Wright Reverend once said during an interview regarding his former parishioner: He said that then Senator Obama "will say whatever he has to say in order to get elected". And it appears that he was right! However, even the Wright Reverend would likely have to admit by now that Senator Clinton was better prepared, and would have made a better President than his former parishioner Senator Obama has been up to now.

All of us who really understand what is going on in this nation and the world, and the direction that this nation and the world is trending towards, must continue to work together, repair the damage that has been done to the revolution and get it back on track. However, we need to do so with the right kind of leadership, to wit each one of us must release the leader that is inside of each of us! I suspect that any one of us, could do just as good a job as the individuals that we have been putting our faith in to represent us for years now. For we certainly couldn't do any worse, I suspect!

In conclusion: And to those of you who are thinking, awe Solomon is simply crying sour grapes because his candidate was not selected in the primaries to run for the office of President of the United States of America. My response to each one of you who feels that way, and to others who are sincerely wondering why I made the decision to supposedly 'waste my vote', is, how are you feeling about the individuals that you voted for, Obama Hussein and John McCain about right now? Are any of you happy, Republicans, Democrats or Independents?

In fact, it was not me who wasted my vote, apparently it was each one of you who wasted your votes and that is why you are so chagrined!

For the fact of the matter is that my choice for President in 2008, has distinguished herself even more (in America and around the world).

Even in the court of world opinion, America's current leader, President Obama Hussein, isn't any longer viewed as the person that the world (nor his supporters) believed that he was, for that matter, during the run up to the election or since he was installed as President of the United States. Remember the record number of individuals who attended his inauguration or watched it on television? And how about the record number of individuals who voted for him, a feat never accomplished before in the history of the American electoral process? And what are each one of these individuals thinking or saying now?

The fact of the matter is that the President is doing so poorly that the Secret Service recently reported that death threats against the incumbent President have decreased substantially, since the time that he first entered into the office; and that is a good thing. On the other hand, the individuals who once feared his purported revolutionary candidacy, mostly from the Republican Right, neither fear him nor do they any longer believe that they have anything to worry about anymore. On the other hand, his supporters are the ones who can't sleep at night because President Obama is the gift that keeps on giving to the Republican Right!

And for those of you who are fully discouraged, now that a preacher is dumping on the current President hopeful, following the disgraced presidency of George Bush, here is a portion of a cool scripture for you (and is subject to interpretation of course).

Ecclesiastes 5:8 and 9a If thou seest the oppression of the poor, and violent perverting of judgment and justice in a province, marvel not at the matter: for he that is higher than the highest regardeth; and there be higher than they.

Moreover the profit of the earth is for all:

In other words, someone higher is watching the whole matter, both human and non-human!

Peace & Grace
Rev. C. Solomon

BTW: Reverend Graham has since apologized for his prior position regarding Dr. King and the Civil Rights Revolution. Perhaps someday Mr. Obama will apologize for his having stopped the unprecedented Revolution of his time. For as a result of his actions, many more individuals have become a part of America's burgeoning underclass, and I suspect that over the next 3 years, many more individuals will be added to their number if things don't change soon!

In Light of Obamastan!

What must the people in Sweden be thinking now?

I tried to warn everyone who told me that they were voting for then Senator Obama, to become president of the United States, even though they had not sufficiently vetted him, that he was a wishy-washy recapitulator and a novice - but no one would listen. Eleven months later, some are conceding that my impartial analysis of the nascent President was in fact correct.

I wonder what the folks in Oslo are thinking about their decision to give him a Noble Peace Prize now, particularly, in light of his recent decision to follow the path of George Bush and Dick Cheney and prolong/escalate the unjust occupation of Afghanistan.

Does this contradict what I wrote before about the selection of President Obama when he was voted to receive the Peace Prize? Actually what I wrote before was that the people who voted for him were the winners of the prize in this sense, the people voted for for change. How can Mr. Obama with a straight face go and pick up the coveted prize. Factually, he has turned the whole scenario into one big joke. He has made the Peace Prize voters look stupid, and he has garnered the support of Republicans.

The latter should help to replace the support that Obama lost when he betrayed Democrats and Independent Voters. Thank God that members of the Congressional Black Caucus, led by the Honorable Barabara Lee of Oakland California, are beginning to see the errors of their ways when they changed candidates in mid stream!

The people in South Africa learned that by simply voting for a black President does not in anyway gurantee a change of condition, Mandela and Mbeiki apparently did there best, however, not much has changed in Soweto, Johannesburg, for the farmers or the rest of the county as far as blacks are concerned! What the world needs in terms of leadership is neither black nor white, instead the world and the people need competent and experienced leadership!

Mr. Obama is entitled to a learning-curve, but given the problems that are facing both America in the world, he should have gone to school prior to applying for the job of President of the United States of America.

Peace & Grace
Reverend C. Solomon

to be continued.