Sunday, November 02, 2008

Obama and Socialist Propaganda

[Look up on Google images the "Obama campaign art" or "Fairey, Obama" and you'll see the image I am referring to, since blogspot took the image down]

[Frank] Shepard Fairey is the graphic designer behind Obama’s campaign artL[. Who is Shepard
Fariey? He’s a contemporary graphic designer/artist whose popularity is owed to his work on the streets as a illustrator in the skate scene of the early 90’s and beyond. This campaign art looks a little socialist,
no? What about this skate scene graphic designer would bring him to use socialist symbolism in his work? Well in 1990, as a 20 year old, he wrote a manifesto where he links his work with the work of Martin Heidegger. Heidegger was named Rector of the University of Freiburg in 1933 and in his inaugural address praised Nazism. He continued to embrace National Socialism (the Nazi party) until the very end of the Second World War. And THIS is one of Fariey's influences and idols?

Now why would Obama want Fairey, who explicitly says in his manifesto that a former Nazi (National Socialist) supporter is one of his influences, to design campaign propaganda for him? Well who knows? But the links to socialism keep coming to the forefront and his choice of using Fairey's work does nothing but support that notion. So if he is trying to distance himself from the claims of socialism, this does not help his case. In no way am I saying Fairey or Obama are Nazis because they are not. But Fairey's use of Hiedegger's concepts and Obama's use of Fairey's services for campaign propaganda speak volumes.

Did Obama appreciate Fairey's work? Well check out the thank you letter he wrote Fairey here: http://overspraymag.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/obama_letter-to-shepard-fairey.jpg

[Keep scrolling beyond the first Obama images]

DISCLAIMER: I am not calling Obama a socialist, but merely pointing out the references to socialism that can be found through campaign propaganda. Some of his policies are socialist in nature and as we can see is prevalent even in the work of those hired by Obama to work on his campaign. Example: Fairey's work.


Take a good look at the image below. Now, scroll down through the rest of the pages at previous socialist
propaganda art. Notice anything similar? Notice the figures in the pictures. Notice their facial expressions. Notice the colors used in the pictures.





Your browser may not support display of this image.



Your browser may not support display of this image.Your browser may not support display of this image.


Your browser may not support display of this image.Your browser may not support display of this image.Your browser may not support display of this image.Your browser may not support display of this image.Your browser may not support display of this image.Your browser may not support display of this image.Your browser may not support display of this image.Your browser may not support display of this image.


All images can be found through Google's image search and are freely open to the general public and are not original images.



Saturday, November 17, 2007

They Just Don't Make Americans Like They Used To

In light of today's events, particularly with Iraq, I have noticed that they just don't make Americans like they used to. Hearken back to the Second World War for a moment. America was united, collectively tuned into Franklin Delano Roosevelt's "fireside chats" during the evening and coming together to do their part for the war effort during the day, often times sacrificing basic needs for American success against Germany and Japan.

Even the newspapers ran editorials and commentaries spelling out the hopes of defeating Germany and Japan. The liberals of that time, mostly in news media, united with conservatives on the issue of total war. The implications of such unity between liberals and conservatives was Allied victory in World War II.

There was no dissent at the rate and pace, among liberals, that we see from them today concerning Iraq. Even some U.S. troops who had joined the service and were still active duty neglected their American duty - the duty they knew that had to encounter; the duty they vowed (with their signature on the dotted line) to accomplish.

Most who cowardly neglected their duty fled to Canada, to avoid prosecution. Cowards.

Fleeing their national and professional duties, these servicemen gave up their citizenship in my mind and are no longer welcome in the United States. They have perverted what it means to be American and what it means to wear the uniform of our armed forces. They have disrespected the bravery and sacrifice of those who currently and have previously served in the military.

Back to the liberal media. Countries like Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, North Korea, and China have no better ally and friend than the American liberal media. The liberal media is the first to jump on the civil rights issue when it comes to Guantanamo Bay detainees. They believe these terrorists, who were intent on killing Americans at any cost, should have the same basic liberties that an average, law-abiding U.S. citizen has.

That is beyond absurd.

Oh, and torture does not equal execution, so please do not treat it as such. I do not believe torture is acceptable, nor do I believe it is consistent with the values the country has stood and always will stand for. But just keep in mind the true intentions of those being held at Guantanamo Bay.

The terrorists and militant Islamic organizations around the world would be wise to exploit the liberal media for their aims - they will be more than welcome to the terrorists.

Play right into their hands, Liberal media, right into their hands......

They just don't make Americans like they used to. Please prove me wrong, our country needs me to be wrong for the sake of our basic ideals and democratic beliefs.

Friday, November 09, 2007

You don't like America and You're an American? Then move!

It strikes me as extremely odd that some "Americans" are so un-American in their thought and in their lives. How can this be?

Granted, I neither believe nor subscribe to everything politicians present as American. Nor do I equate politicians with being the ultimate representation of America. At the bottom of it, they are ALL politicians, racing to see who raises the most money so the winner can cater to particular interest groups and lobbyists. The plight of American and Americans is not at the top of most politicians' mind, even though it may appear as so.

But, I do not throw around my un-Americanism because I simply am not un-American or anti-American. A lot of people in this country do not realize how fortunate we really are, and I will put this into a historical context before I get to those ridiculous American-born anti-Americans.

Let us start with the American Civil War. Despite the fact I am from Chester, VA (was once part of the Confederacy), I do not for one moment wish the Confederate States of America would have succeeded in dissolving the Union and becoming a free confederation within the United States. If not for Union victory in the Civil War, America could very well have turned out much like the Soviet Union, a fractious mess with no direction. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, there remained countless countries with no particular direction nor proper means of government. And we still see today how former Soviet blocs are continuously failing at meaningful and successful government.

We, in America, do not have to wrestle with violence and upheavel day after day like much of the world. I.e. - Iraq, Afghanistan, Israel, South America, India, China, Pakistan, North Korea, and the likes. Violence, unless you have been comatose the past 50+ years, is a staple of day-to-day life in the above mentioned countries. America is very peaceful and everyone has the opportunity to live in a peaceful country, though some choose to be counter-productive to society and choose to ruin it for the rest of us. We simply do not have the day-to-day violence in the streets like most troublesome countries have. Granted we have the inner-city gangs and other forms of organized crime, but we do not have suicide bombers disrupting our lives at every chance.

Which brings me to the meat of my reason for ranting. That being those un-American Americans. Sit in a college class on politics, well, sit in ANY college class and you can identify some of these un-American Americans. In one of my classes, one such student professes to be anti-democratic as well as anti-American and does so on a daily basis regardless of the fact that the class is NOT "Why I, as an American, hate America" or "Liberal America Discussion." Keep that stuff to yourself. Why? Not just because I do not want to hear it, but because it will prevent you from conveying your own idiocy.

With that said, if you do not like America and profess to be anti-American please leave and do not let the door (that has provided you with a peaceful, free environment since the day you were born) hit you on your way out. Where then will you go?

If you are anti-democratic that leaves you with destinations such as North Korea, China, Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Somalia, the Sudan, and what else am I missing? Saudi Arabia... what else? Well you get my point.

If you are simply anti-American that leaves you with Canada (a border country), France, Venezuela, Russia, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt, or any of the countries listed in the above paragraph.

Have fun deciding what your new home will be and once you reach your destination, just stay there. And once you find out that America really wasn't as bad as you thought it was, just remember you are anti-American and therefore, America is not the proper choice. Once you leave because of your anti-Americanism please do not return, just stay out because we do not need you.

On the other hand, for those around the world who are stuck in a bad situation and have suffered (truly suffered) in and want to escape from such anti-American and anti-democratic countries, America's doors are open. Welcome to religious freedom, welcome to political freedom, welcome to peacefulness (relatively)!

Speaking of religious freedom in America, that too has struck me to a vast degree. Though we profess religious freedom, it is becoming more commonplace to displace the Christian. While Christians in America have accepted religious freedom and therefore have not hampered those who practice Islam or Judaism or Hindu or Wicca or whatever they practice, from practicing their religion and building their places of worship.

Increasingly today, the Christian is the brunt of most attacks. Christians are becoming targets the way they did in the early days of Rome. The only difference is we will not resort to the underground practice of our religion, despite the efforts of many Liberals to thwart Christians. We can no longer pray openly in schools nor can we say "under God" while saying the pledge, yet the Liberals do not make the same rules and regulations for those of other religions. Oh and the world has come to an end because a statue of the Ten Commandments was placed outside a court building on the day of its inception many years ago. Today, that is unacceptable to Liberals.

Let me just point out to them that our country was founded upon religious freedom as one of its primary principles. Yes I am a Christian, but I do not wish for those of other religions to not be able to practice their religion when and where and how they want. You Liberals need to keep America in its context. You Liberals need to hearken back to the founding fathers' principles of democracy just as they have written it. Freedom for all can be found in the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. Though some of the founding fathers meant "Freedom for all, except _________," it is not written that some should be excluded. And that means freedom for Christians as well.

Beware of these anti-Americans, these anti-Democratic people, these extreme Liberals, these un-American peoples and institutions for they will be the death knell for America and democracy.

Sunday, September 17, 2006

Sunday 9/17

Today was a good day in light of recent events. . . The sun was out, it was no hotter than about 78 degrees in my estimation, the skies were blue [few clouds], and football was on even though I only watched bits and pieces.


Morning came and it was breakfast time and then off to church. Pops made blueberry muffins and cinnamon muffins but forgot to put the cinnamon on so it was kind of blah, but nothing touches blueberry muffins people! Church was great because I hadn't been in a while and it definitely helped me out immensely in this new era of Mattness. After that it was definitely time for an afternoon nap.


[Pretend that you care about what I did today]


My car was remotely vandalized by some close friends last week and left it kind of dirty so I decided to get off my butt and wash it, ArmorAll it, and vaccuum it out and it looks amazing, I must admit. Want pics? Okay.


















Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Friday, April 21, 2006

Rant on Current Events

I haven't posted in just about a month, which seems odd because I thought I had just posted a blog just yesterday (it felt like). The past month has flown by and time shows no sign of slowing down anytime soon, especially since finals are the week after next, graudation the following week, and a NJ trip. Then starts my work-filled summer -- I'm at Petersburg National Battlefield again this summer and I really don't consider it work because it's fun and a lot better than most jobs. So I just caught you up on events surrounding me, which should last you until June. Now for the rant that has been itching to be written for a while concerning current events in the political spectrum of the U.S.

Yes, in November 2004 I voted for George W. Bush and I have NO regrets -- he was the best candidate, he didn't pretend to be and suddenly become a Christian just before the election like John Kerry, and he was Republican and shared many of the same views I have on certain issues. John Kerry is not the devil or anything, but I do not think he could have cut it. On top of that, he flip-flopped on many issues in a matter of 3 years and his indecisiveness is what killed his campaign in November 2004 -- he DID NOT show the solidarity that Bush showed, despite the fact that Kerry was a better orator. Neither were great speakers, but Kerry definitely had the advantage.

Now, for my rant.

What has made President Bush's second and final term in office poor has been the people he has surrounded himself within his cabinet. Consequently, he has made some poor decisions and has supported questionable policy. After indulging in the research of current events in my Politics of the Middle East course, several issues have jumped out at me and have clarified themselves quite a bit.

The first policy of the Bush administration I take issue with has been on the debating table for quite some time, since about 2002. And that is the issue of toture and interrogation, strictly at Guantanamo in Cuba and at Abu Ghraib in Iraq. I am not blaming President Bush personally for the events that took place at these two locations, but I am blaming President Bush for having people in his cabinet that went out of their way to ensure the interrogation techniques were legal and within the parameters of the Geneva conventions WHEN THEY WERE NOT. That man being Donald Rumsfeld.

In February 2002, President Bush was advised by Donald Rumsfeld, U.S. Secretary of Defense to take on a political course that would "circumvent the Geneva conventions, which prohibit both torture and 'outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment'" (The New Yorker, Feb. 27, 2006). Did President Bush know at the time it was circumventing the Geneva conventions? No. Rumsfeld did and he failed to inform President Bush as well while at the same time consoling the president and ensuring the interrogation techniques were legal and within the Geneva conventions.

Granted the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were deliberate attacks on the U.S., our beloved home,the attitude of many Americans and especially the Pentagon was that of determination -- determination to defend our country, determination to fire back at those who fired first. Alberto J. Mora, former Navy general counsel commented that the mood in Washington at the time was that "the gloves had to come off. The U.S. had to get tougher" (The New Yorker, Feb. 27, 2006). I totally agree with that statement. The U.S. did HAVE to get tougher or another 9/11-caliber attack would be succesful. Enter the department of Homeland Security.

It was set up for all the right reasons and has become quite effective, so far, in preventing another terrorist attack on American soil. We certainly had to get tougher and I do not oppose most interrogation techniques, but some are out of line, despite the fact that the suspects may be terrorists who blatantly kill innocent Americans. The U.S. has historically been known as the safeguard of the world (20th century and beyond) and has done right in combating Communism through the successful policy of containment (the Soviet Union died and only 2 minutely succesfull communist regimes exist today) and terrorism through the creation of Homeland Security. So, why now become hypocritical and "circumvent" sneakily past the Geneva conventions we so desparately supported to combat evil, if you may, around the world? Donald Rumsfeld is to blame for many of the circumventing of the Geneva conventions when it comes to interrogation techniques that have been questionable legally. Bush is to blame in the sense that he kept people like Rumsfeld in his cabinet.

The second policy of the Bush administration I have taken issue with is the recent nuclear dealing with India, "the world's biggest democracy and one of Asia's rising stars" (The Economist, April 8th-14th, 2006,34). President Bush made a historic visit to Delhi, India in February to extend the benefits and the advantages of America's civilian nuclear trade deal. In the deal, the U.S. has agreed to sell India nuclear plans for civilian nuclear facilities, primarily for nuclear power which would address many problems in India's vastly populated country. That part sounds fine and dandy correct? Yes. However, the other part to the deal allows President Bush to "lift restrictions on America's civilian nuclear trade with India, even though [India] has the bomb and rejects the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty" (made to help prevent nuclear weapons technology and the weapons themselves from falling into the wrong hands).

President Bush is known for his War on Terror, which includes non-proliferation laws and policies, and has devoted countless pages and speeches to promoting the battle against terrorism wherever it may be and strangely enough, he accepts the fact that India rejected the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty -- all because he wants to solidify a future friendship with India for the U.S. Is good relations with India worth making the U.S. hypocritical of its own policies? NO!

Also, in the India deal, there comes to the forefront yet another person Bush surrounds himself with that just harms his administration and his own character. Condoleezza Rice, Secretary of State, has "strongly defended the deal as being good for American jobs, good for friendship with India and even good for efforts to shore up the global anti-nuclear rules" (The Economist, April 8th - 14th, 2006, 34).

Really? Good for American jobs? How? At the same time, a great number of jobs are being outsourced to India. It may be good for bringing back American jobs that were taken because of outsourcing, but there will be no significantly notable increase in American jobs.

Good for friendship with India? Oh yes. India now gets what they want nuclear-wise and also gains an economic friendship with the U.S. on top of the economic boosts it has been receiving due to outsourcing. India certainly is not complaining and the U.S. feels now that India, because of the deal, will feel that it is in their best interest to keep their nukes under tight scrutiny without having to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. It's kind of like giving a kid a candy sucker and assuming he will be good for the rest of his childhood days because "it's in his best interest" to do so. SKETCHY.

Good for efforts to "shoree up the global anti-nuclear" laws? No way. This deal is the epitome of the complete opposite. It is BAD for efforts to shore up the global anti-nuclear laws. Like I said above, because of the U.S.'s acceptance of India's rejection to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it does nothing to support anti-nuclear laws. This deal severly harms any serious attempt to solidify anti-nuclear laws.

That deal just does not make any sense when you degrease it to see its bare bones. I just think it's one more giant step backwards in curbing/preventing nuclear proliferation because India is bound by NO LAW if they just so happen to elect a bad egg who finds it his right to aid countries by giving them nukes.

In short, I voted for Bush in 2004 because he was the best candidate at the time and he shared many of the political beliefs I held. He also showed he would not back down on the War on Terror and he was not wishy-washy on any issue -- he had a direct, consistent view on events. Also, I think Bush has hurt himself in many ways by having members in his cabinet who pursue questionable policies domestically and internationally. But of course, he did not know his cabinet members would take such stances on policies before hand - nobody can tell the future. BUT, once the cabinet members became questionable in their policies, Bush should have cleaned house. No wonder Colin Powell left the administration.

Amid such events, I still would have voted for Bush if he had the opportunity to run for election in 2008, knowing about these particular events and questionable policies. BUT, many things would also have to happen for me to unquestionably vote for him (IF it were possible for 2008): Rumsfeld must be out, Cheney must be out (even though he makes no legislative or administrative decisions that greatly affect American foreign/domestic policy - he just comes off as quesitonable), Rice must be reigned in forcibly, and he would have to get a press secretary not scared to answer honestly and straight-foward.

That is all. I'm not much of a political man, but I do have ceratin rants I just need to get off my chest.

Friday, March 24, 2006

Little bit of catchup w/ my ranting, please?

So, yet again I am posting a blog randomly it seems after 2 months of dormancy. A lot has happened since then so I'll just give you a short rundown on the important events or at least the events that stand out most in my head.

February? Wait, there's a February? Ahh yes, I remember now...... The lost month of Februrary was just that - lost. You've got Valentine's Day, which was awesome because I did something new and actually fixed filet mignon and a bunch of good stuff for Maria and myself. That was a new twist on the same old "holiday." What else did I do in February? Mostly I slacked and fronted that I was doing school work even though I did read a lot for classes. Didn't have many tests to study for so February was fun, but cold.

As slow and non-eventful as February was, things sure did start to pick up once I turned to "March 2006" on my Subway Calendar (yes, I bought a footlong and got a calendar). From March 1 to March 10 I pretty much did nothing but countdown the days to my Spring Break and that was awesome. We went to Panama and spent a couple days in Panama City, PANAMA and then stayed at a Beach Resort for the rest of the week. It was filled with 90-degree weather, blue skies, awesome water, sunblock, and a cool group of Italians. It made me want to start learning more Spanish...... [i know, it sounds weird.... you would think I would have said Italian].

Spring Break was fun, but went by way too fast and now it's time to get back to work and finish off my last semester at Longwood.

So my professors definitely wished me well on my trip to Panama before I went and now they welcome me with a super load of school work. My week will go as follows:

Monday
Class, 11-11:50
Studying/Reading/Starting Thesis, 12noon - 12midnight??
Sleep

Tuesday
Class, 9:30-10:45
Class, 11-12:15
Study, 12:30-1:40
TEST, 2-3:15 (CRAP!)
Write 12-15 page Thesis -- due 10am Wed.
Sleep (if possible)

Wednesday
Class, 10-10:50 (TURN IN THESIS)
Class, 11-11:50
Study, 12noon - 12midnight for 2 tests
Sleep (Again, IF POSSIBLE)

Thursday
TEST, 9:30-10:45
TEST, 11-12:15
Chill, 12:30-1:45
Class, 2-3:15
Study for test on Friday

Friday
TEST, 11-11:50
Head home
Work @ Ukrop's

As you can see, my week includes every possible freaking activity known to man as well as FOUR tests and one THESIS on the Petersburg Campaign of 1864-1865. Man, if you see me and I look either 1.) pissed off 2.) tired 3.) stressed out OR 4.) All of the above, please ignore me and get back with me NEXT week, which is a little less eventful.

Just passing the time until Spring Weekend on April 7, 8 . . . . .you're invited so BE THERE!

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

4 months of blog catchup

Well, as you can tell (maybe) I have posted on my so-called and heavily promoted blog.

So, just as I predicted, Duke beat Texas on the Dec. 10 game and in convincing fashion. JJ scored 41 total points as Duke rounded up the Longhorns with a 31point win. #1 (at the time) Duke defeated the #2 team in the country 97-66. So much for Luke Winn of CnnSi.com's prediction. Maybe he should watch a few Duke games BEFORE predicting a loss. And to think -- he gets paid to do this.

Other than Duke stuff, I'm well on my way to graduating. The Fall 2005 semester went by quicker than any semester I've ever known and I expect this semester to go by even faster. Everyone keeps asking me "What are you doing when you graduate?" Well, my answer to them is now "I'm taking the GRE and I'm going to start applying for graduate school." My goal is to get into the VCU Graduate Studies in History program and ultimately further my education to the highest level with a Ph.D. at some school that offers it. Being a college history professor would be the sweetest job and it would be fun because I'd be indulged in what I love. I'm definitely trying to avoid a job in corporate America after seeing the cruelties of the highly competitive and brutal world that is corporate America.

I'll try and keep this crap updated more often mmmkaay?

austin dwi attorney
austin dwi attorney