Is Obama Following The Steps Of Fidel Castro?

The following Editorial, written by Manuel Alvarez Jr., who escaped from Cuba, and became an American citizen may me a terror mirror of the thinking and activisms of Barack Obama v. Fidel Castro. Read the following Editorial and do your own observations of comparison. The Editorial appeared in the Richmond, VA Times-Dispatch on July 7, 2008, and e-mailed to me by Deanna Phillips, Portland, OR. The Editorial may be seen on the Internet at: http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/search.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2008-07-07-0033.html

Beware Charismatic Men Who Preach 'Change'

Each year I get to celebrate Independence Day twice. On June 30 I celebrate my independence day and on July 4 I celebrate America's. This year is special, because it marks the 40th anniversary of my independence.

On June 30, 1968, I escaped Communist Cuba and a few months later I was in the United States to stay. That I happened to arrive in Richmond on Thanksgiving Day is just part of the story, but I digress.

I've thought a lot about the anniversary this year. The election-year rhetoric has made me think a lot about Cuba and what transpired there. In the late 1950s, most Cubans thought Cuba needed a change, and they were right. So when a young leader came along, every Cuban was at least receptive.

When the young leader spoke eloquently and passionately and denounced the old system, the press fell in love with him. They never questioned who his friends were or what he really believed in. When he said he would help the farmers and the poor and bring free medical care and education to all, everyone followed. When he said he would bring justice and equality to all, everyone said "Praise the Lord." And when the young leader said, "I will be for change and I'll bring you change," everyone yelled, "Viva Fidel!"

But nobody asked about the change, so by the time the executioner's guns went silent the people's guns had been taken away. By the time everyone was equal, they were equally poor, hungry, and oppressed. By the time everyone received their free education it was worth nothing. By the time the press noticed, it was too late, because they were now working for him. By the time the change was finally implemented Cuba had been knocked down a couple of notches to Third-World status. By the time the change was over more than a million people had taken to boats, rafts, and inner tubes. You can call those who made it ashore anywhere else in the world the most fortunate Cubans. And now I'm back to the beginning of my story.

Luckily, we would never fall in America for a young leader who promised change without asking, what change? How will you carry it out? What will it cost America?

Would we?

Manuel Alvarez Jr., Sandy Hook., VA

Respectfully submitted, and God Bless America!

NC Government - A System Of Laws Or Special Individuals?

If the story is true http://www.newsobserver.com/politics/story/1169144.html, why are Beverly Perdue associates not being investigated by NC Attorney General Roy Cooper? Why is Lt. Gov. Beverly Purdue allowing political associates to “illegally and unethically” review records and change the reported results of another state employee? If that is not bad enough, Beverly Purdue’s General Counsel was allowed to view the records of another state employee without any authority of the NC Ethics Committee or the NC General Statues.

It appears that under Beverly Perdue’s leadership, it is run (y)our government, without any NC Ethics Commission and/or NC legislated law. Government cronies are to cover by Beverly Perdue associates and their illegal activities. This would be a good time for Beverly Perdue to immediately fire Kathleen Edwards and General Counsel Will Polk, for their illegal activity of reviewing records when neither was authorized to do under NC General Statues and/or the NC Ethics Commission. Amanda Thaxton should be rehired with back pay. Furthermore, and according to the Raleigh N&O, Ms. Edwards changed the official record without any authority. For that part, it appears Beverly Perdue fails to abide by any Ethics Commission. I would bet Beverly Perdue got a report on the illegal findings.

Are NC voters considering electing a tinted candidate for NC Governor? Is this another Beverly Perdue cover-up, whom it seems to do as you please, and we will cover up the illegalities.

NC AG Roy Cooper should join forces with Auditor Les Merritt now, to fully investigate, and indict Beverly Perdue and others, if these findings appear true. Our US Attorney should join in. Is Beverly Perdue running an old German Gastope? Based on the N&O reports, Beverly Perdue and/or her associates may belong in jail, rather than in any open Democratic Republic system of government.

Is The Democrat Party the Lawyers Party?

From: The e-mail bag - Deanna Phillips sends this from the USA Northwest, the Great State of Oregon. Mrs. Phillips is one of my regulars. It seems that lawyers today now look at any criminal and their activity, try to decide how they may get the criminal to be declared not guilty, regardless as to whether the criminal is guilty. Lawyers refer to this as offering the best defense. To me, finding a criminal not guilty is protecting the criminal and his/her crime, rather than protecting our law abiding citizens. I wish the ABA would take a look at themselves and their activity. Maybe, each lawyer should take a look in the mirror and see what they see in protecting our American flag, our US Constitution, and our freedoms. Compare your own decisions based on our forefathers, who authored our Constitution. It seems so many in the legal profession have separated their own visions from our Constitutional founders.

Now that former Sen. John Edwards has admitted that he repeatedly lied, will the Bar Associations disbar him from his legal practice, or will they allow attorneys lying to be an acceptable practice? SCOTUS did disbar former President Bill Clinton, for lying under oath, from practicing law before the US Supreme Court. Democrat lawyers on Capitol Hill seem to have idiot-ized our government in D.C., especially, on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

And now, thank you Deanna for your following input.

Thoughtful point of view

The Democrat Party has become the Lawyers' Party. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are lawyers. Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are lawyers. John Edwards, the other former Democrat candidate for president, is a lawyer, and so is his wife, Elizabeth. Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate). Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school. Look at the Democrat Party in Congress: the Majority Leader in each house is a lawyer.

The Republican Party is different. President Bush and Vice President Cheney were not lawyers, but businessmen. The leaders of the Republican Revolution were not lawyers. Newt Gingrich was a history professor; Tom Delay was an exterminator; and, Dick Armey was an economist. House Minority Leader Boehner was a plastic manufacturer, not a lawyer. The former Senate Majority Leader Bill First is a heart surgeon.

Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office 31 years ago and who barely won the Republican nomination as a sitting president, running against Ronald Reagan in 1976. The Republican Party is made up of real people doing real work. The Democrat Party is made up of lawyers. Democrats mock and scorn men who create wealth, like Bush and Cheney, or who heal the sick, like First, or who immerse themselves in history, like Gingrich.

The Lawyers' Party sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America. And, so we have seen the procession of official enemies, in the eyes of the Lawyers' Party, grow.

Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers, and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.

This is the natural consequence of viewing everything through the eyes of lawyers. Lawyers solve problems by successfully representing their clients, in this case the American people. Lawyers seek to have new laws passed, they seek to win lawsuits, they press appellate courts to overturn precedent, and lawyers always parse language to favor their side.

Confined to the narrow practice of law, that is fine. But it is an awful way to govern a great nation. When politicians as lawyers begin to view some Americans as clients and other Americans as opposing parties, then the role of the legal system in our life becomes all-consuming. Some Americans become "adverse parties" of our very government. We are not all litigants in some vast social class-action suit. We are citizens of a republic that promises us a great deal of freedom from laws, from courts, and from lawyers.

Today, we are drowning in laws; we are contorted by judicial decisions; we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big. When lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means, as happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power of lawyers in America is too great. When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to us, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

We cannot expect the Lawyers' Party to provide real change, real reform, or real hope in America. Most Americans know that a republic in which every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy.

Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.