The Big Red Mat is a blog that discusses politics, both in the United States and abroad. I focus on my political beliefs and what I consider correct, however I leave commenting open to anyone.
I sent this letter to Fox News about their Obama "joke":
I am asking my readers, as well as anyone else to boycott Fox News after the comment Liz Trotta announced that should would be happy if Obama was assassinated. There is no place for jokes about an assassination of a candidate for the president of the United States. Whether or not she, or Fox News agrees with his views or policies suggesting that he should be assassinated is not only negligible for a news program, but it is also extremely un-American, and quite honestly absolutely no reliable respectful media would ever air such a comment.
At the very least a national apology should be made for letting the comment air when it was such a gross mistake. Shame on you Fox News. You have proved how far you will go in order to meet your goals. Your channel category should be moved from a right wing news channel to pure and utter gossip.
For those of who have not yet been able to view the comment, please view it here:
...and if you would like to send your comment to the show that Liz Trotta said these comments on, please send an email to americasnewsroom@foxnews.com
Terrorism is not new, but the way it has been branded during the Bush Administration is indeed unique. If we want to try to decrease the amount of individuals that would cause harm to us and to our friends we have to start from the beginning. What is terrorism? The dictionary term for terrorism is defined as: The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.
There are some basic principles that we need to understand. First we must remember that any media that reports terrorist actions are indeed spreading terrorism. If a terrorist organization completed a horrendous act, but it was not reported on locally or globally there would be no intimidation, and hence no reason for terrorists to continue to harm people for ideological or political gain. Of course we can not ban the media from reporting these terrorist actions. After all - it is news, but when politicians run campaigns solely based on fear we must hold them accountable for helping the terrorists with their goal. This might be a hard concept to swallow, but it is true. Terrorists want to scare their enemies so they can obtain whatever they want, so why are politicians doing the same thing? I can not just blame republicans with this issue. George W. Bush, John McCain, and Hillary Clinton are all guilty of creating an unnecessary level of fear simply to gain power, and to win elections.
"The only thing we have to fear is fear itself - nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt
Americans understand that there are significant threats to this country from organizations that wish to do us harm, but we need real solutions to our very real security problems. Diplomacy has been under attack for the past seven years, and when Obama simply stated that he wanted to talk to leaders of countries and organizations that are considered our enemies diplomacy was attacked again. Terrorism and state sponsored violence, or even fear from other countries is nothing new, however the way it is being packaged today is very different from our history. Have we forgotten the cold war? Though the United States and Russia were involved in a heated arms race we still talked with each other. During the Vietnam war it was the Chinese that were exporting weapons to Vietnam, however Nixon sat down with China and worked with them, and even now we are currently working on diplomatic discussions with North Korea, however the president and other members of the republican party completely disagree talking to countries like Syria & Iran. There is no way to increase stability in the middle east without having diplomatic discussions with both Syria and Iran. Iran is exporting weapons to Iraq to help Iraqi rebels (also known as "the insurgents") to harm the American installed Iraqi government and our soldiers. Syria & Iran are exporting weapons and quite a bit of money to Hezbollah in Lebanon, and Hezbollah is bent on destroying Israel. If we don't work with these two countries there will never be any semblance of peace in the region.
Americans also need to realize that politicians in countries like Syria, and Iran run on a campaign of hate, just as politicians here run on a campaign of fear. The citizens of these countries do not have access to the international media as Americans do, and these ideologies are not just taught by politicians, but also by the media and educational institutions. Just as many Americans bought into the idea of FEAR, the citizens of these countries have bought into the idea of HATE. The process of eliminating terrorism is not simply a political one but a human issue.
Here is a sample of what the children of Palestine are being brainwashed with:
It is very easy to hate an entire country without realizing that they are being taught hate by their parents, teachers, politicians, news reporters, and even children cartoon shows. The only way to defeat, eliminate, or at least decrease the amount of people that wish to do us harm is to teach them otherwise. We need international support and money to create schools, to negotiate diplomatically with the leaders of these countries and to try and deliver uncensored world news to the masses.
Before we invaded Iraq we were told by our leaders that Iraq was responsible for 9-11, and that Saddam Hussein was going to bomb us with his weapons of mass destruction. We were lied to, and as a country, we voted to go to war with Iraq, and 5 years later we have displaced 4 million Iraqi refugees, and killed almost 100,000 civilians by military or paramilitary action. Is it that hard to believe that an entire population could be lied to and commit reprehensible acts on a people based on the word of politicians?
What we need is diplomatic negotiations, followed by understanding. Of course, our negotiations, will always be backed up by a threat of force, but it should be exactly that - a back up solution, not our primary course of action when dealing with a country that is our enemy. I urge any politician to talk about foreign policy, however as Americans we deserve to have unbiased truthful information instead of talking points that are shown on the 11 o'clock local news. I understand that politicians want to win their elections, but there has to be something more then just the winning of an election. This can not be the entire goal of a politician, and yet when politicians run their campaign by instilling fear in the American public I don't see what good it does for them, their party, the American people, or to the world in general.
Many major media outlets such as CNN, MSNBC, The Washington Post, and even David Gergen, former advisor to Bill Clinton, have all said it is over for Hillary Clinton. The truth is that Hillary Clinton's chances of winning have been slim to none for over two months. The difference now is that major supporters and super delegates are now switching their support to Obama. Many have seen her negative campaign ads, and her blatant pandering, such as the backing McCain's plan for a gas tax holiday for the summer, as the last straw. Supporters such as:
- DNC member and superdelegate from New Jersey Christine Samuels - Former Democratic National Committee Chairman Joseph J. Andrew - Washington D.C. councilman Harry Thomas Jr., - Service Employees International Union member Sarah Swisher - Civil rights leader & Illinois senator John Lewis - United States Representative, Senator, and Democratic presidential nominee George McGovern
...and the list is growing.
Hillary Clinton has proved that her campaign part of the problem of the "old politics regime", instead of a political solution. From the 3 a.m. ad, to the ads lying about where Obama is getting his money. People know she lies, and she'll do whatever it takes to meet the end goal. Unfortunately for her, that is not the type of president that most democrats want in the white house. We just had an administration that did whatever they wanted without keeping the constitution, and the will of the people that elected them in mind. Nobody, not even republicans want 4 more years, and Clinton is looking more and more like McCain's running mate.
What's more is people have finally started to question her "experience". For months know everyone has been trying to find out what the 35 years of experience actually where. Thirty five years takes us back to 1973, when Hillary Clinton was finishing up law school. Now Clinton does have quite a bit of professional experience including corporate and public-interest law, and she performed advocacy work for the Children's Defense Fund as well, but she doesn't quite have what t she claims when it comes to government experience. Hillary Clinton had said that her experience in the white house has prepared her for being president herself.
Really? Hillary Clinton did not hold a security clearance, did not attend meetings of the National Security Council, and was not given a copy of the president's daily intelligence briefing. She did make trips to Bosnia & Kosovo, on behalf of the American people but her role was not as a negotiator but merely as the First Lady. After moving to New York, Clinton was elected as senator for New York State in 2000, and was reelected in 2006, and shortly after that she started campaigning for the presidency. Most democrats can see how this information would be a problem in the general election when you compare Clinton's experience with McCain's experience. Aside from his military experience he has been in congress for 25 years.
There is no way her campaign can continue to run on experience, and when she supports things like the gas tax holiday she can not run on change. She is loosing support with democrats, and super delegates, and with the recent delegate wins for Obama this week, she has increased the gap between her and Obama with respect to total delegates. It is getting increasingly harder for Clinton to continue, and on top of all of this - her campaign is having money issues. She has loaned her campaign almost $6.5 million dollars. People are not willing to invest in a loosing candidate, and her campaign knows it. The question now is what will she do.
There is no chance of Obama selecting her as his Vice President, or a prominent Cabinet position with the campaign ads and statements that she has made. She has made that decision for him because there is no way Obama can run on change and bring Clinton on board his administration. So what will she do?
My guess is that her campaign has given up, and they are doing their best trying to convince her, but she hasn't given in yet. One thing is true, Hillary Clinton is a fighter, but like most voting democrats, I don't want someone like Hillary Clinton fighting for herself, I want someone that will fight for me.
Barack Obama’s former minister Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr has made comments that are upsetting to many Americans, however I don’t believe that this story is as big as the media makes it out to be. I understand Reverend Wright has some beliefs that many of us don’t agree with, but how does this affect my understanding or respect of Barack Obama? Is the media saying that Obama shared Wright’s views because Wright was Obama’s minister for many years? Obama has given quite a few interviews and speeches where he has said that he does not share the same views with his former minister, as is the case with the vast amount of the religious population in America. Is the media implying because of Wright’s influence in Obama’s life Obama is less unpatriotic? Obama has dedicated 20 years of his life to community service, and is running for the highest office in the land. I don’t see how anyone can come to this conclusion. Personally, I believe Rev. Wright is not unpatriotic, but he is bitter. He’s bitter because of what african americans have had to deal with for hundreds of years. We can’t forget the fact that Rev. Wright was a US Marine and a navy officer, or that he lead his church with over 10,000 members for over 36 years, but even I must disagree with some of the racially biased comments that he made. In the end, however there is absolutely no clear link between Rev. Wright’s comments and Obama’s candidacy for president. There are links between ministers and other candidates that can leave a much more sour taste in your mouth.
John C. Hagee is a CEO of his non-profit corporation Global Evangelism Television (GETV). According to his book, A Warning to the World, Hagee believes that that Russia and the Islamic states will invade Israel and will be destroyed by God. This will cause, the head of the European Union, who he also believes is the “anti-christ” to create a a confrontation with Iran. In his latest book, Jerusalem Countdown, he states that an Iranian confrontation is a necessary precondition for Armageddon, which will mean the death of most Jews, in his eyes, and he Second Coming of Christ. Hagee said Hurricane Katrina was an act of God, punishing New Orleans for "a level of sin that was offensive to God." He referred to a homosexual parade held on the date the hurricane struck and this was proof "of the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans." Hagee has called Catholicism a “false cult system”, and “The Great Whore”, however John McCain went out of his way to seek Hagee's endorsement. McCain spokesperson Jill Hazelbaker says, "Hagee endorsed John McCain. While we welcome his support, it shouldn't be seen as a wholesale endorsement of all of Mr. Hagee's views. In fact John McCain was asked about this issue personally and McCain told reporters that "it's simply not accurate to say that because someone endorses me that I therefore embrace their views."
Exactly. Why is the Wright-Obama discussion still hot? Let’s keep going...
Rodney Lee Parsley, a televangelist of World Harvest church and founder of the Center for Moral Clarity, a key McCain ally in Ohio, continually discusses his dislike for activist judges, civil libertarians who advocate the separation of church and state, the homosexual "culture", the "abortion industry," and the entertainment industry, but Parsley targets another threat to the United States: the religion of Islam. In a chapter titled "Islam: The Deception of Allah," Parsley warns there is a "war between Islam and Christian civilization." He continues “I cannot tell you how important it is that we understand the true nature of Islam, that we see it for what it really is. In fact, I will tell you this: I do not believe our country can truly fulfill its divine purpose until we understand our historical conflict with Islam. I know that this statement sounds extreme, but I do not shrink from its implications. The fact is that America was founded, in part, with the intention of seeing this false religion destroyed, and I believe September 11, 2001, was a generational call to arms that we can no longer ignore.” In his book, Silent No More, he notes that Christopher Columbus shared his goal: "It was to defeat Islam, among other dreams, that Christopher Columbus sailed to the New World in 1492...” McCain has been largely silent when asked if it was appropriate to seek Parsley’s endorsement given his views on Islam and homosexuality.
I guess some hateful white ministers are acceptable and some black ministers are not? Note to the Media: Stop playing "gotcha!", on issues that have no bearing on this country, or this election. We need political reporting that is 100% yellow-free.
Nope. Today is the democratic primary in Pennsylvania, and Obama & Clinton are still going at it hard. Obama has done quite well so far. He was behind 24 points, and now he is behind 6-9 points (depending on which poll you believe). I think Obama will win Philadelphia and that means he has a real chance to take the state, however whether or not Hillary Clinton wins Pennsylvania the democratic primary will continue. I see no reason why her campaign would concede after the Pennsylvania primary if they haven't conceded before. As Clinton gets tougher and more negative Obama is only getting stronger. Frivolous issues like wearing a lapel pin, his former minister, or his "bitter" comment don't seem to be affecting the polls as much as the Clinton machine wanted. Even today Bill Clinton accused Obama of playing the race card, again and there doesn't seem to be any affect. People have stopped listening to a man whom I consider to be the best president in my generation's lifetime. His comments are not destroying the democratic party, but they are destroying how many Clintonites fell about him. Their tactics are not working anymore because unlike the primaries in Ohio & Texas, Obama learned to play hardball and even the Clintons have got to admit he's quite good at it, and he never steps down to their level while responding to their accusations.
So if someone doesn't concede today what will happen? Basically, more of the same. The democratic party will come together, people forget that most Americans have political ADD. By the time the general election comes around everything that was discussed in the primary will be long forgotten. There is no danger that democrats are going to vote Republican or Independent this time around. I voted for Obama in the New York Primary and I will vote for him the general election. I'm fairly certain that he'll not only win the nomination, but also the general election, however if Hillary Clinton was to somehow win the nomination I would definitely support her in the general election. This is not because I agree with all of her views or her tactics, but McCain would continue the destruction of the United States of America. George W. Bush said he was a uniter, well apparently this was one statement where he was actually truthful. He united 80% of the country to disapprove of his presidency, and I believe that like me, people are so disgusted by republicans that they will continue to vote democratic even if the tactics, or exact views are not to their liking.
