Posted on 09/05/2012 3:58:02 PM PDT by South40
Michele Obama’s speech was deeply personal, electrifying and definitely a plus for President Barak Obama. She truly has the Democratic based eating out of “her hand”. She was masterful and technically worthy of great admiration. She captured the “feeling” decisively, item after item, and issue after issue.
And as Charles Krauthammer said “I didn’t believe a word she said”. Why? Maybe it was because what she said wasn’t heard by most. The camouflage of semantics was masterful. Or, the committed heard what they wanted to hear. And the speech, on paper, lacked substance, which Michele Obama made up for with real passion, conviction and honest sincerity. She had the “wedge” issues coordinated so beautifully, framed so brilliantly, that one felt “collectivism” is the new “faith” of the Democratic platform. Thus the exclusion of any mention of God seems more than appropriate…replaced by “faith” in what?
“Collectivism is a basic cultural element that exists as the reverse of individualism in human nature (in the same way high context culture exists as the reverse of low context culture), and stresses the priority of group goals (government) over individual goals (personal exceptionalism) and the importance of cohesion within social groups (such as an “in-group”, in what specific context it is defined). Collectivists usually focus on community, society, or nation.” Hidden behind words like American exceptionalism, it is not. Hidden behind individual exceptionalism, it is not.
(Excerpt) Read more at hollywoodrepublican.net ...
She obviously didn’t write the speech.
Charles Krauthammer’s analysis of Michelle’s speech nailed it.
All i got out of it was we belong a plantation working for them so they can live high
-final line of George Orwell's 1984
“The only way in which your repentance, your forgiveness can be authentic, your reception of it can be authentic, your repentance can be authentic, is that you give back what you took – and white people took a lot from black people. The only way you can be saved according to this theology, if you are the oppressor, is to give back what you took through reparations.”
I have never owned a slave and modern-day blacks have never been one. The end.
It is one matter of ill-refutable logical note, that Freedom is invariably the subject of individuals whereas slavery is the subject only of collectives.
What you have and have not has nothing whatsoever to do with your capability but rather your will to do. Who you are is indeed defined by what you choose to do, not simply your desires.
This is the primary argument of the ages. The identification of the “we” as opposed to the “I” is ancient. The “we” model has resulted in tribal identities, and is responsible for urban gangs, redneck outlaws, African tribal brutality, Stalinesque death camps, jihadists, the subjugation of cultures for millenia, and imposes a border from which individuals do not cross. It is and has been a governor upon human accomplishment. It is the primary difference between the French Revolution and the American, and always ends in subjugation and mediocrity. The “I” results in human progress, although with it a substantial amount of greed and misbehavior. Most, if not all, of human innovation has come about through individual innovation, and without it, we would be stuck in the medieval mindset of the Islamists. It is all very romantic to cheer for the group, but groups do not accomplish much accept for making their group members feel wanted. Interestingly enough, Marshall McCluhan proposed that electronic media would increase the tribalism of mankind. Maybe he was right.
“I have never owned a slave and modern-day blacks have never been one.”
Sounds like you’re using oldtimey justice. Haven’t you heard of “social justice”? It’s a lot like justice, except unjust.
That makes all of us “white” people.
What a radical nutcase Miss Obama is to believe that because some ancestor of some “white people” owed slaves some of whom are ancestors of SOME “black people” living today that we all owe something to them same black people.
Even if my ancestors owed your ancestors as slaves and they didn’t that doesn’t mean I owe you a thing! We are all born into this world with nothing but the skin on our backs.
While our parents may raise us it is a demonstrated fact that our own judgement is the greatest driver of our success or failure. One would think modern African Americans would start to recognize this given their downward spiral post 1960’s as they let Their hate and sense of entitlement wreak their culture, family, and business.
When a person expects anther to provide for them, or that the other owes them something they will continue to seek retorbution as the easier alternative to actual work.
There are not excuses in life, whether or not someone stole your car is illrelevent when you spent more time trying to to get vengeance upon them than the car is worth.
This is why the bible teaches forgiveness.
The bible also teaches not to hold one man responsible for the crime of anther. Such as modern day “whites” who may or may not even be related to past “whites” who enslaves “blacks” that may or may not be related to modern day blacks.
There is such thing as the notion of justice, I am afraid Nether Obama the mister or misses have any concept of it.
I read once that the name of every Indian tribe, when translated into English, means, “Human Being”, indicating that members of other tribes were not........
Pay yo taxes and shadduup!
We should get a bumber sticker:
“
There can be no justice in “social” justice
“
Put a Communism hammer & sickle on it.
She wants him to get 4 more years because she has grown fond of those lavish vacations that all of us cannot take but we pay for. She likes the White House and the servants. She likes it all and does not want to give any of it up. Therein lies the real basis for her speech.
do. don’t do. there is no try.
- jedi master yadayadayada
It is and has been a governor upon human accomplishment. It is the primary difference between the French Revolution and the American, and always ends in subjugation and mediocrity. The “I” results in human progress, although with it a substantial amount of greed and misbehavior. Most, if not all, of human innovation has come about through individual innovation, and without it, we would be stuck in the medieval mindset of the Islamists. It is all very romantic to cheer for the group, but groups do not accomplish much accept for making their group members feel wanted. Interestingly enough, Marshall McCluhan proposed that electronic media would increase the tribalism of mankind. Maybe he was right.
Actually, it's the primary false dichotomy of the ages.
The false assumption is that somehow, wihtout help, there would not be "the group."
But the truth is, with human beings, there will always be the group. Even deliberate anarchy is a form of group that would have to be managed.
But collectivism denies this truth, and asserts that groups only exist when they are coerced, and that only coerced groups are peaceful. Which, if you think about it for even a moment, proves immediately self-contradictory. Yet that's it's basis, and it works bacause of the contrast it makes to the bog bugaboo - the identification of individualism with chaos, poverty, war and corruption. And THAT works because of people's lack of spiritual courage - it is much easier to join a group, than develop oneself.
So, those who WANT chaos, poverty, war and corruption use democratic process to promise spiritually lazy cowards freedom from having to develop themselves if they vote for the creation of a coercive group.
And the fools do it.
Evil people don't create evil in people.
They reward it, and then organize it.
That is why Franklin said: "A Republic, madam, if you can keep it."
What he actually should have said is: "A Republic, madam, until you sell it to monsters in return for a piece of paper that says you don't have to be responsible for your own life anymore."
But for all his brilliance, Franklin couldn't imagine that so many people would live such despicably low lives that this could ever become a viable political strategy.
Or maybe he didn't want to imagine it.
Yup. I cringed at her recent remark about Obummer leaving his shoes lying around, “but we have people around to pick them up”. She certainly has gotten “grand” in her nouveau riche-ness.
I told my wife that “soaps” were back. The drama was thick, but truth hard to find.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.