And what of Barack Obama? Is he as naive as his starry-eyed throng, or has he just been manipulating them all along. Perhaps it is just his unique blend of of dishonesty and incompetence, or maybe he has a unique set of skills that was never meant for an American President; fate missing its mark, mistakenly putting an East African autocrat into a Hawaiian maternity ward.

Many of the independent voters are coming around. The multitudes of unactualized blacks have no perceived incentive to show up at the polls in 2010. For fourteen more long months pipe dreams and childish fantasy will hold their supermajority over American government. Only then will the country will begin to emerge from its current prepubescent state.

this is a mental thing that is fomented and kept fresh. you can see it all over, but since its all over, you dont see it until pointed out. collect a bunch of interviews with leftists, high up, low down, etc.

when they talk about other administrations, people, etc. their perception and understanding of circumstances is always simplified to “you just dont want to”.

and when things dont work out for them its always a paranoid “professor morairty (the conservative behemoth that is invisable – the invisable other capitalism, oppressors), has foiled our plans”.

this attitude or understanding, or world view, or schema, or whatever you want to call it to understand it, is cultivated because it foments hate out of every situation where something someone wants is not being done and they have little knowlege of the process by which it works. they embody the 60s idea of “we dont want to understand it, we just want to tear it down”,.

so with the war, they dont want wars, and the war is going on, and any real powerful person, like a president can just say no to it. if they arent, then they must like war and must want war, and enjoy war, and so deserves my utmost contempt and disrespect. (social exclusionary principals – and when they dont walk away, they just get bigger and bigger till you have effigies, etc).

so if one is raised on all this and has these right attitudes, then one will step up to the plate before one is fully cognizant (which one cant be in such a framework if its believed, not used), and will believe that such things are just will and not method.

he wills it, and so shall it be…

its a misalignment of expectations and functional understanding of proccess, with a constant way to look at it, being applied, so as to increase hate or anger and be able to direct it by describing things in certain contexts and ways. ie, they are keyed to things being presented in a certain way that makes it easy for them to become indignant and then angry and know who to direct it at (the designated ones to blame, the oppressors, etc). and once they know who to direct it they call their ire justice, so its ok for them to do it, and not the other way around (as those things are not santified as ok).

“USA keep potential terrorists who are operating international in future when they are neither fitting in US law nor in in international rules (which are only saying what you can not do angaist war-prisoners – but are not giving any answers how to finght international terrorism)”

Gets messy since some of the international community has ratified treaties to give terrorists war prisoner rights and they then assume this is international law for everyone… even though we never ratified it and it does not.

Our domestic law has a category for these types but even Bush didn’t have the guts to wheel it out. They fit neatly into the categories reserved for pirates… people who could be executed on the spot when captured if they were too dangerous to send home for trial… Otherwise, they could be executed after the trial… If we want to go international law, under our interpretation of international law they fall right into war criminal status…

It will have to be Mars. 😉

Obungler (and company) is a deliberate enabler, staying just below the proverbial radar screen where the myopic masses are too busy, too tired, or too shallow to look…

Bingo.

I would take this as the epitome of sophomoric reasoning, viz., that the options before one necessarily sum to zero.