https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/c...,0,92000.story

Real Men

In 1961, a young African-American man, after hearing President John F. Kennedy's challenge to, 'Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country,' gave up his student deferment, left college in Virginia and voluntarily joined the Marines.

In 1963, this man, having completed his two years of service in the Marines, volunteered again to become a Navy corpsman. (They provide medical assistance to the Marines as well as to Navy personnel.)

The man did so well in corpsman school that he was the valedictorian and became a cardiopulmonary technician. Not surprisingly, he was assigned to the Navy's premier medical facility, Bethesda Naval Hospital, as a member of the commander in chief's medical team, and helped care for President Lyndon B. Johnson after his 1966 surgery.

For his service on the team, which he left in 1967, the White House awarded him three letters of commendation.

What is even more remarkable is that this man entered the Marines and Navy not many years after the two branches began to become integrated.

While this young man was serving six years on active duty, Vice President Dick Cheney, who was born the same year as the Marine/ sailor, received five deferments, four for being an undergraduate and graduate student and one for being a prospective father.

Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, both five years younger than the African-American youth, used their student deferments to stay in college until 1968. Both then avoided going on active duty through family connections.

Who is the real patriot? The young man who interrupted his studies to serve his country for six years or our three political leaders who beat the system? Are the patriots the people who actually sacrifice something or those who merely talk about their love of the country?

After leaving the service of his country, the young African-American finished his final year of college, entered the seminary, was ordained as a minister, and eventually became pastor of a large church in one of America's biggest cities.

This man is Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the retiring pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ

__________________
"The nurse should be cheerful, orderly, punctual, patient, full of faith, - receptive to Truth and Love" Mary Baker Eddy
Visit www.HealthSalon.org

Not knowing either the person named, or his church, I have to say that it is clear that a patriot is one who will GIVE something to his country, rather than those who TAKE from it.

Quite a stretch to compare Bush with Clinton . . . an obviously very,
very biased piece.

Have a look at:
https://www.bercasio.com/movies/dems-wmd-before-iraq.wmv

__________________
Imagined knowledge kills learning . . .
The cure for boredom is curiosity...there is no cure for curiosity..

IMO, there's nothing honorable about who/what Jeremiah Wright has become. Unfortunately, we cannot (and should not) be judged solely on the noble acts in our past. And, by that standard, there's still hope for Mr. Wright to find redemption from his current fall from grace.

If Obama isn't the Democratic Party nominee, it will largely be due to his affiliation with Mr. Wright. An unintended consequence of (Wright's) madness or showmanship gone awry.

__________________
You're officially invited to visit my natural health blog: www.healthyfellow.com

I think Rev. Wright had had a long career of noble acts within his church work, When you look at the long list of projects his church has supported its not hard to figure out.

Quite frankly, those sound bites are words and thoughts I've had about his county at times. I certainly had it when I saw us heading into war with Iraq but god help me at the time If I dareded to sound umpatriotic. This war has been a blunder from the inception.

There is still great injustice in our midst and our government, of still mostly old white men, and it perpetuates itself through their wheeling and dealing, payoffs, money grubbing selfish interests, Rev, Wright is not a perfect being and likely has suffered, or members of his church have suffered great injustice in their life time. Injustice like most of use have never seen or thought possible for ourselves and our children.

Having lived in south dallas, such words that he used, although not beneficial to anyone, are the thoughts of many people, and having hung in black homes due to my work at the time, I have heard it first hand, as well on the street, as racist comments were flung my way by both hispanic and black folks.

I think some black people clearly see and live the duality. There is hate and anger towards the white people and institutions that have set them back and there is respect and affection for the white people who have labored for freedom and justice on their behalf.

I was a nurse to a child in a black family. I went to their house every day for a year and a half. They were quite poor. They had several sons and grandsons that they housed and supported. Both husband and wife got breast cancer. Both eventually died. They were good people. They cared for this very sick child that was a niece. All the young men in the family had been to jail or prison, including this husband, while he was younger. The family was plagued by learning disabilities, jail history, unemployment etc etc. A whole quagmire of social issues. The schools the kids went to were dangerous. I mean really dangerous. Same schools my kids would have gone to except I had the fortitude to get them into better schools.

I think white people are shocked when they hear such speech as Rev. Wright spoke because they are in denial that racism still flourishes, that damages still cause pain, emotional and spiritual. Its easy for the while folks to live in their insulated communities and to think that everything is fine when it is not yet fine. People like Rev. Wright hear the cries of his flock over many years. This is a grevious pain to carry and could break any man that is not a living saint.

He's a man who has counseled and prayed with those who were down and out. Those damaged by racism and the violence it perpetuates. He has worked to lift them up, to give them strength to go on. So if the anger gets to him once in a while I can forgive that. A few bad words will not destroy all the years of good work and it apparently has not damaged Obamas campaign as his ratings went up after his speech on racism.

Wright calls the US , US of KKK. He says that the US government invented the HIV virus as genocide against the black people.

I don't call that lifting up the spirits of his people. I call that creating more hate. I call that making the division greater.

Obama is distancing himself from Jeremiah Wright.


April 28, 2008
https://youtube.com/watch?v=ELz55Ya3q4c

I was in the patent office files years ago. I read the patent for the HIV virus that was produced by a biological researcher in the US government. I read it with my own eyes.. That patent is no longer there, at least I have been told that it was removed.

Not my opinion as I have no way of knowing, but there are quite a few people who think HIV was taken to Africa in tainted vaccine.

I do think that the subversive elements of our government are capable.

We are all struck in horror at what Saddam Hussien did with chemical weapons yet we, the US government, provided him with chemical weaponary. Did we think he would never use it? Do you give a child a loaded pistol to play with and if you do who is responsible if he kills himself or someone else? What if you gave chemical weapons to a madman?

Our government has been capable of horrendous things and has done horrendous things.

Just how horrendous is it that aspertame has been taken off of the neurotoxin list and place in your food?

And how horrendous is it that poor people are enticed to test toxic drugs by giving them to them free?

And how horrendous is it that the government promotes the sale of weapons across the planet and moves arms in subversive ways? Weapons that don't even work? Did we not pay some yokels just recently, in Florida, 300,000,000 dollars to move weapons into Afghanastan? Well. We did. Weapons that don't even work intended for people to defend themselves against terrorists. Do you think that action like this might make people hate Americans or at least our government? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uba37udqF9A

The US government has spent many millions on chemical warfare and biological "death" research. HIV, in my opinion is a result of that. I have read the papers.Reading these papers found in the US government patent office spun me into a depression that took quite a while to pull myself out of. It was after reading these papers that I came to face and understand much that I did not before.

Britain screwed up with Hussein too. We funded Iraq during the Iran war. Then in the Kuwait gulf war, some of the military arsenal used against Britain was ours.

Last time I heard about 5-6 years ago, Britain was owed between 180 million, and 220 million for weapons sales, by the likes of Jordan, Venezuela and Algeria.

Algeria has quite a few of partisan type dissidents in it, who work on a kind of mercenary basis, and aren't trustworthy. They may also kill if needs be, so for us to give a country like that weapons, is not good in my view.

The only way for this to change is if we change our leaders.
In the letters to the editor section of our local paper a fellow was commenting on with all the people in the country why is it that we can�t seem to find any truly outstanding candidates to run for president?

This is the reply that I wrote:

On 4-30 (fence Post) Steve K lamented that considering all the possible candidates that we could have for president why is it that the current list of winners are such losers? I couldn�t agree with him more.

But is this really surprising? Since this campaign began much of the media have spent most of their time fawning over these finial candidates. Yes there were some other candidates early on but their ideas were quickly rejected and others that were considered too threatening were virtually ignored. Why was this?

Could it be that the people who are really in control of the government didn�t want them? Could it be these puppet masters operating behind the scene are using the media to control the elections? To them it does not matter one wit if a candidate is democrat or republican the ONLY thing that is important is whether that person, if elected, can be counted on to do whatever they�re told. Having been hand picked from the beginning the current crop candidates clearly fulfills that requirement.

All that is required of us is to vote for either tweedledee or tweedledum. But first, if they�re to maintain this ruse, it is absolutely vital for us to jump up and down wave our red and blue flags because it�s important for us to feel that we�re in control.

Of course if you really want to be in control you could vote for third party candidates or even a write-in. Naturally you will be told that you wasting your vote. But could it be considered that by holding your nose and voting for the supposed lesser of two evils, that this is the real wasted vote?

what I would like to know is how to do this legally, so it would have to be counted.

if everyone voted for the same 3rd party, then maybe it would be heard.

But don�t you see it? That is the beauty of our current system. Those individuals and groups that are actually in command have control the major parties, thus they determine who you can vote for, and they make it difficult to impossible for a third party to even get on the ballot.

Of course you can �always� do a write-in, but you best be sure you know exactly how to do it or it will not even be counted.

[Why is it when it comes to selecting a Miss America we get 50 choices. But when it comes to electing the president we get only two.]

I get it MadScientist.. the point wasn't exactly obtuse.

exactly. and this is what I'm asking. what exactly are the rules for a write-in vote? do you know? I guess I could look it up.. just thought you might know.

LOL

Thought. Why does America only permit a president 8 years max in office?

I've heard positive things about Reagan, at least to support a theory that Reagan could have been a 12 year man, or longer, although being British, wide knowledge of his actions isn't something I could have found out about, though some say by the end of his second term, he may have already been in early stage Altzheimers, and it would have been hard for him to go beyond 8 years, without being forced to step down.

That is something only he and a select few political and medical minds would have known.

The truth is, in the last 40-50 years, we only had 2 people exceed such length over here.

More recently Blair, or Blerh depending on your viewpoint. I subscribe to the latter and always did.

Although 1979-1991, we had Thatcher, and the Iron lady lasted a long time, until a leadership vote forced her out of control by her own party. Some say it's down to her believing she was bigger than her Cabinet, and therefore being less receptive to major individuals in her party, and their views.

She still lasted 12 years though, so why doesn't America hypothetically allow a President to rule beyond 8 years? Especially given the King or President, (forget what he is), of Egypt, has been ruler for over 50 years, and apparently is a decent man, unlike Castro who ruled Cuba fron 1959 onwards until his death, but wasn't.

Admittedly when you think of some of the people who have lead America in recent years, Bush the clown, Clinton who nearly got impeached, Bush senior another apparent fool, and Carter the Peanut growing idiot, I believe he was, and others, America hasn't had anyone seemingly worth more than two terms, in the last 40-50 years, bar Reagan, who was not allowed, and JFK who couldn't have anyway, tragically.

So this two terms thing still confuses me, when other countries have shown they can have long-term, successful, "good" rulers of any type, why America limits their Presidents to 8 years max?

Not exactly. I did a write-in some time back, followed the instructions, or so I thought! Only to find out latter that I needed a �special ballot�. How dare one think that they can buck the system.


The reason is found in history, seems that the founders of the country only wanted those individuals who were truly interested in �serving the country� to be elected to office. These individuals were to share their knowledge and wisdom and then return to their real life. Basically they wanted to see statesmen in charge to the country not career politicians. Sadly our real statesmen have been are few and few between.