Moving ahead is the only option humanity has period.

"A modified capitalism," sounds o so much like "creative capitalism"; and they are both simply empty phrases from those who already have much, but it does sound "compassionate."

Howsabout -creative socialism-, all are rich in spirit as well as in this world! He-he!

Let me c here . . .

Aloha Deepak

You are excluding retro intention. Your viewing time as linear, America is now imploding upon herself but through self-governing she can experience the effects of retro intention. If anyone wants to hear about retro intention Lynne Mc Taggart shares about it towareds the last part of the interview. Click my name. It is not too late for Bush to resign.. they do it in other countries.. well maybe with retro intention:) love patty shaking the bone:)

The Madness of Medved

“Fortunately, the Good Book reports no liberal interest groups of antiquity who insisted on defending the civil rights of Philistines or Amalekites.”

Yes, thank goodness there were none to speak out against God-ordered genocide. Who knows what may have happened, history could have ended at that very moment! YHWH works in mysterious ways after all . . .

Medved goes on: “the redistributionist rhetoric of the Obama camp demands financial and standard-of-living guarantees disconnected from an individual’s hard work, productivity or moral worth.”

“Moral worth” eh. So “productivity” and “moral worth” separate the havers from the have-nots eh. So if you have a good job at Boeing or Lockheed making weapons, or work tirelessly selling insurance, or even write for a magazine calling for more war and tax-exemption for your buddies, you are “morally worth” more than children smoking meth by the age of ten b/c that is what their environment dictates, persons whose genetics may have predisposed them unto unsavory lifestyle choices, or other people who chose poverty as a line of work. Naturally, prisons, disease, and death for the latter, and beachfront property for the former, are sure indicators of a person’s “moral worth.”

Obviously, Jesus was one worthless son of a . . .

Whoa now!

“A society becomes rich only if its members create wealth . . .”

Is that all these people think about? Money!

“Liberals want economic intervention not to protect or reward virtue, but to restrain the natural consequences of virtuous behavior such as disciplined work, patient saving, stable family formation, and entrepreneurial risk-taking.”

Now “entrepreneurial risk-taking” is a sign of virtue! Too funny!

Will the on-Godliness never end?!?

“Instead of glorifying the business people who sustain communities and provide jobs, liberals try to show their compassion by sanctifying the homeless – a population overwhelmingly categorized by substance abuse, criminality, and untreated mental illness.”

So instead of glorifying money, “liberals” show compassion for the poor. Bad liberals! Bad liberals! Talk about calling good evil. Medved also calls evil good encouraging pre-emptive wars to secure economic interests, aye, he writes, “Every war in American history involved an economic motivation – at least in part, and nearly all of our great leaders saw nothing disgraceful in going to battle to defend the commercial vitality of the country.”

If it makes money it must be good! Spoken like a “true” American Christian. From here of course moral absolutes must not be far . . .

“The liberal discomfort with ethical absolutes became painfully apparent . . .”

Written by a person who probably believes that lying is ok under certain circumstances, and pre-emptive murder is ok under other circumstances; the only “ethical” absolute these type of people believe in is “private property,” mine, mine, mine!

Regardless, even though Medved may appear to have an open mind when he writes, “A non-Christian (like Joe Lieberman) could easily preside over state occasions because even though his faith differs significantly from that of the Christian majority, his obvious attachment to faith in God and Old Testament principles shows sympathy, not hostility, to the generalized value of faith.”

To be sure, his “generalized value of faith” precludes atheists, Buddhists, and most probably also Muslims and Hindus, but his “generalized value of faith” also includes killing people for economic interests! Joshua Medved certainly is not!

The madness of Medved and his ilk is in believing war will lead to peace, more so if there is money to be made in the process and in the end; yet this is not truly madness at all, this is simply bloodthirsty greed.

peace

Dear Dr. Chopra and everyone,

Your ideal of having a society that promotes a new realism which focuses on the encouragement of humane attitudes over selfish ones is admirable. This will materialize only after mankind grows into a realization of its divine attributes as opposed to its egoist attitudes. In the meantime, it is the corruption of egoists aimed towards control and profit that is causing the impediments in the free market system. I don't believe that anyone is promoting Socialism and Communism as the twin evils that keep the goodness of free markets from flowing. I don't believe that the right wing deals in sheer illusion.

The answer to the societal woes is not to be found in a Barack Obama. Obama gave his allegiance to Trinity United, a church run by a teacher of Black Liberation Theology which spews hatred against whites. There are four such churches, so he definitely had a chance to change his place of worship if he so desired. The founder of the Black Liberation Theology, James H.Cone teaches that Jesus was an African/Palestinian and that his church was founded to oppose the Roman Imperialists. Cone teaches that we need another black messiah. It is a core teaching of the church.

Obama professes to be a champion of the impoverished. He has supported a "Global Poverty Act" to be run through the United Nations which would give $875 billion to the poor. I believe we have witnessed what has become of donations to poor countries in the past - very little is distributed to the poor and most of it is taken by the heads of state. The United States has already given more than its fair share of aid (taxpayers' money) to impoverished nations. Taking from the rich and giving to the poor does not solve the underlying causes of the poverty. Redistribution of wealth has always been a teaching of radical, socialist, leftists.

Please listen to the Podcast interview with Jerome Corsi, author of the best selling book, "The Obama Nation" on www.aim.org. You will hear facts that you have not been told by the media at large.

Best Wishes,

"Betsy" S.

What you see as a “nationalistic” is to me true courage to stand up to a region of the world in which is living in the Middle Ages. Instead of merely disagreeing with McCain’s position, you instead condemn the entire Bush Administration and his 8 years. Deepak, please find me one person who thought on September 12th 2001 that thought we’d go 8 years without another attack? Please find one person who on this earth who thought that 72% of Iraqi’s would vote in an open election before 2001. What if the Middle East turns into a functioning democracy, a moderate state? Will you back track or will you simply aver that Bush had nothing to do with and “other causes actually” resulted in the success we see their now. As the war in Iraq has turned for the better, all of a sudden it seems many liberals no longer care about the “poor Iraqis” and are upset about how much the Iraqi’s are making from oil revenues.
Moreover, Mr. Chopra (I sincerely mean “Mr.” with respect, not to sound smug), what about karma? What about the souls who are not evolved enough to hear your message? What about those people Buddha said no “medicine” will make them healthy? Do we simply isolate ourselves from them and leave to their own devices? Or should we, as Krishna advised Arjuna to do, and fight against an ignoble enemy?
I believe if you wanted to attack the Neo-Con ideology it would be to attack their idealistic ideals of implementing a democracy in a land where literacy rates hover around 60% and most are brainwashed by a dangerous religious triumphalism. I would respect that view very much. That is a real argument, rather than attacking the men behind the ideology as somehow morally inferior to yourself and your crowd. That does nothing to move the nation forward. Bush is not a bad man, he simply has a different ethos than you. Both of you are noble men; yes, you and Bush have a lot in common. Just different ways of bringing those things in common into fruition. Again, my opinion.
You once said you would open a “Disney Land’ in the Middle East. That may work (I think that is a great idea actually) but how in the heck would that work unless you kill off the people who would blow up the families trying to go enjoy themselves? One theologian (Forgive I forget who) once said that killing men who would kill others is a duty, for not only is one protecting the innocent, but one is also saving the man who would kill innocents from the grief of doing so. Plus, it may not be as easy as it seems to open an amusement park in the Middle East. I do not know if you heard about the outrage that was sparked in the Arab world after the movie Aladdin was made. They hate all things Western, for many of the reasons you allude to later in this essay (i.e. the pitfalls of capitalism.) Further, it seems the Islamic terrorists beat you to the “Disney land” idea – observe “Mickey Mouse” teaching children how to fire an AK-47 and throw grenades.
Let me address the “three flaws of capitalism” you mentioned:
Capitalism discourages equal access to wealth, leading to enormous gaps between rich and poor.
This is a ridiculous assertion in my opinion. Nowhere in the world has there be a better chance for people to move up the economic scale. The gap between the rich and the poor is miniscule with hard work. To be middle class is relatively easy in this country: First, finish high school. Second, go to college. Third, don’t have a kid until you are financially secure. Fourth, get married. Fifth, pay your bills on time. People who do those things, that is, take personal responsibility for their own lives, can live a great life in this nation. (Look it up). I believe it is your message that “everybody should follow their bliss” that leads to people more problems. Some people should be happy being average human beings. That is, kind, hardworking salt of the earth types. What a noble life that is, is it not? Further, your entire argument is debunked by the millions of people who risk life and limb every year to get here for jobs and a better life.
The free market lacks a conscience, giving rise to inequalities of education, health care, and job opportunities.
Forgive me if I resort to some anecdotal evidence, but I lived in the inner city for 3 years, and was around the same neighborhood for 6 years. Everyone of the so-called “disadvantaged” people in the neighborhood had either (1) not mastered basic conversational English or (2) did not pursue a higher education. We are the only nation in which people go to the welfare lines on cell phones. Don’t believe me? Go check it out. Everyone one in that neighborhood had an “X-box” few had a single book. (I know this because I used to tutor my ex-girlfriend’s younger sister and her friends in math and English… By the way, the problem with our education system is that teachers are more concerned with being liked than with teaching. Just my opinion – of course, based on observation.)
Finally, capitalism if unchecked promotes corruption, both economic and political. In the wake of Tom DeLay's corrupt selling of Congress to the highest bidder, the collapse of Enron, and the untrammeled greed that led to the current subprime mortgage crisis, these flaws should be glaringly obvious.
The fall of the housing market was a combination of factors and to blame it on “capitalism” is ridiculous, in my opinion. In fact, why did the lending industry approve so many bad loans? Why? Because of liberal legislation that threatened lending organization to lend to people without qualifications. In fact, instead of having a “high credit score” people could simply say, “I will go to credit counseling” and that counted toward a higher credit score. I agree, there were some very greedy people (I actually met some of them unfortunately) who knew that they were signing loans over to people who could not afford them. But what does that have to do with capitalism? Again, what of personal responsibility? In my opinion, people should understand what they are signing. Moreover, 95% of people in the US are making their payments on time.
One last thing, I do not believe that we “indulge the wealthy.” The top 2% of earners already pay 70% of the tax burden. That is a fact. And I think that hardly constitutes indulging them. Further, the wealthy are usually business owners – that is, the ones who create jobs for others. The rich are the most valuable assets in our nation, in my opinion.
The poor and middle classes interest have not been ignored. That is utter nonsense in my opinion. People are split into 3 energy groups: tamas, rajas and sattwas. Why hate the rajas because the tamas don’t have enough energy to go out and get?
We have had less than 1 year of a bad economy and it seems you were simply waiting for this so you can denigrate the United States from every single angle: economic, spiritual, foreign policy, domestic policy, etc.. Everything is so doom and gloom in these blogs, in my opinion. The only “optimism” is placed in a mere man – Obama. No man is a savior. He is very human. A great symbol of possibility in a capitalistic market, in a great Country that only 60 years was split racially. What more could you want from a society that is self-corrective?
Again, it has been less than 1 year with a bad economy, after 7 years of strong growth. Housing market crashed because of liberal policies; Oil is up because of China and India’s consumption – simple supply and demand. Basic economics. It is not Bush’s fault anymore than it was Clinton’s “fault” for the boom in the 1990s, he simply happened to be President during the dot-com boom. He was a great steward of that wealth. Bush, I would agree, should have been more conservative with spending. That is a legitimate argument against Bush.
Either way, we are not in a recession (something you said we were in)– that takes two quarters of downward growth; just because something “feels” like a recession does not make it a recession. By saying there is a recession is that kind of like a nocebo effect? Are you simply making things sound as bad as they are so you can have a hero?
Everything you write, in my opinion, does very, very little to promote the harmony you so desperately want. In fact, it makes those who differ with you either feel guilty about their beliefs or more strident in protecting them. Either way, it does not help the country “move forward.”

Aloha Deepak and Everyone

Here is an interview with Ron Paul telling it like it is on the DNC Camps and Nato Click my name for the first half. love patty

Dear Dillon and Patty,

Thank you for your insightful commentaries.

Ron Paul is a voice of sanity amidst a sea of governmental insanity. I wish he was still in the running for the presidency.

Best Wishes,

"Betsy" S.

Hi Deepak,

Your post was the only sign of hope I saw today other than some I had to create myself.

You summed it up very well.

I have been working on a new evolved replacement, which I am sure will mesh with the work of others.

It is not just words, there are detail steps for execution, technical infrastructure with real results.

I realized that due to ego impediments those now entrusted were not going to get anywhere in a timely fashion. So it would require a lone agent working with divine aid.

Hope to have your support.

The reality is that a critical mass will need to overcome their individual ego impediments to embrace it. If this does not happen then only a few can be preserved and the ego bastards are not among them just the ego divine.

As for the destruction of Ego and Illusion, Shiva and Kali are close at hand.

You know who will be most surprised are those that thought and were claiming they were serving God, when they find they were actually serving the ego, the Anti Christ. I guess they didn’t actually read the Bible; somebody read it for them and left out some key points.

“When history no longer repeats itself, it means that evolution has occurred”
~.me

There is this other hope, this Agent 013, I hope it is not just another fiction.

013.me or click my name.

I wonder how the Democratic Ego convention will go. We can only hope that somehow a voice of spirit will take the wind out of the ego.

I once had a dream. In it I was sitting at a table and before me were two agency controllers.

They put on the table a half a glass of water and two pills a red one and a blue one. They said that I must choose one and it would determine my destiny.

As I was pondering my choice, one of the agents quipped “so is the glass half empty or half full?”.

I said the glass is too large for the amount of water. It was then that I saw through the Illusion.

I grabbed both the blue and the red pill and swallowed them. They stood agape muttering that no one had ever done that, they looked bewildered and I then destroyed them with a single thought, and I was free.

You see the choice between Democrat and Republican, Conservative or Liberal is the big illusion. You don’t have to make that choice; one can choose both freedom and wisdom without being divided.

It is going to be a scene in Infinite Play the Movie.

And you can also amazingly enough read it and more on Illusions.me what a synchronicity, you can also type Illusion.me.

So it is easy to convey verbally.

Or click my name.

Post#5 Dillon Freed.

Once again you summed it up beautifully. I can't imagine what this love afair that Deepak has with Obama is.

Deepak... by the way in a socialist state you would have to share most of your wealth with the state, who would then decide how, when,where and who to dole it out to. Likewise if you fel such compassion for the poor why arn't you giving most of your loot to them anyway? If you feel the need you can start with me. If not, then could you at least refund the money that I am out for buying all your books and tapes these past several years.

Much compassion~paulisoso

**************************************************
Please listen to the Podcast interview with Jerome Corsi, author of the best selling book, "The Obama Nation" on www.aim.org. You will hear facts that you have not been told by the media at large.

Best Wishes,

"Betsy" S.

4. Posted by "Betsy" S

**************************************************

Slime is still slime, even if you put that between the covers of a book.

Unfit for Publication: Corsi's The Obama Nation filled with falsehoods

Summary: In its preface, Jerome Corsi compares his new book, The Obama Nation, to his 2004 book Unfit for Command. The comparison seems apt: Just as Unfit for Command contains false attacks on Sen. John Kerry's military service, a Media Matters review finds that The Obama Nation similarly contains numerous falsehoods about Sen. Barack Obama.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200808040005

Corsi's book has been criticized and debunked thoroughly (with a 40 page rebuttal) exposing the outright lies. He is blasted not just by the democrats, journalists, but also by conservatives, among them prominent thinkers:

+++++++

John Henke on thenextright.com wrote:

"The continued tolerance and prominence of Jerome Corsi -- his books, columns and appearances," Henke continued, "is embarrassing for the Right, embarrassing for Republicans, embarrassing for conservatives and libertarians, embarrassing for all of us."

++++++++

John Hawkins of rightwingnews.com wrote:

"[T]here is one enormous problem with Jerome Corsi: he's a habitually dishonest buffoon who will say absolutely anything to make a buck. He's the Right's Michael Moore, except that Michael Moore has much more talent -- and certain boundaries beyond which, even he won't go." ...

"Keep in mind, folks, this is the same lunatic who has been running around for years telling people that George Bush is going to somehow personally merge the US, Canada, and Mexico over the objections of the American people and Congress. In other words: Jerome Corsi is a conspiracy nut whose credibility level is zero." Hawkins added sarcastically, "Oh yeah, let's put this embarrassing nutjob on point in the attack against Barack Obama -- what could go wrong?"

++++++++

The Atlantic's Douthat sees Corsi's assault on Obama as posing a major danger to conservatism:

"It isn't just that Corsi himself is a conspiracy theorist and a crank, or that his best-selling farrago of innuendo and outright smears exemplifies everything that's wrong with a certain sort of right-wing publishing, or that David Freddoso's The Case Against Barack Obama demonstrates that it's perfectly possible to write an anti-Obama book without descending into the fever swamps. It's that this is an election where conservatives need to be very, very conscious about the importance of line-drawing: If the Right is going to resist the ongoing attempts by Obamaphiles to define various sorts of normal political elbow-throwing (cutting ads making fun of Barack Obama's political style, calling attention to the controversial public utterances of Michelle Obama and Jeremiah Wright, etc.) as inherently racist and hatemongering, conservatives need to be very clear about where the line actually is, and what sort of attacks are actually beyond the pale and worth condemning."

++++++++

Former Bush White House aide Wehner, writing on the Commentary blog, expands on the same theme:

"Corsi's approach to politics is both destructive and self-destructive. If Senator Obama loses, he should lose on the merits: his record in public life and his political philosophy. And while it's legitimate to take into account Obama's past associations with people like the Reverend Jeremiah Wright -- especially for someone like Obama, about whom relatively little is known -- it's wrong and reckless to throw out unsubstantiated charges and smears against Senator Obama.

"Conservatism has been an intellectual home to people like Burke and Buckley. The GOP is the party that gave us Lincoln and Reagan. It seems to me that its leaders ought to make it clear that they find what Dr. Corsi is doing to be both wrong and repellent. To have their movement and their party associated with such a figure would be a terrible thing and it will only help the cause of those who hold both the GOP and the conservative movement in contempt."

+++++++

While the views of Hawkins, Wehner, Douthat and Jon Henke are in the minority, their critiques of Corsi's work, in combination with a resounding repudiation by the mainstream media and a detailed 40-page rebuttal by the Obama campaign pointing out the book's innumerable errors of fact, have so far prevented a repetition the kind of damage John Kerry suffered four years ago when he failed to respond immediately and decisively to the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth.

Want to know something Ironic. I just checked the Illusions.me site and the random Google ad at the moment is for John McCain. God must be telling us something.

There’s some good news in a new survey from the PEW Research Center.

http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=334

A narrow majority now believes that churches should stay out of politics by a margin of 52 percent to 45 percent.

Back in 2004 a majority favored more involvement by the church in politics by a margin of 51% to 44%.

What is especially remarkable is that the partisan differences are not present as in 2004. The previous survey showed that 30 percent of conservatives believed that churches should stay out of politics while 50 percent of conservatives now believe this.

The Democratic Party is also seen as more friendly towards religion as compared to the 2004 survey.

Some people are economic conservatives but are not necessarily cultural conservatives. These people tend to be independent and often vote republican.

I can see how this constituency may have a hard time appreciating Deepak Chopra's views on politics, as can be seen from the recent comments by a couple of readers.

Here's another reason why Deepak Chopra's political views are mainstream rather than partisan. Susan Eisenhower it seems has taken another drastic step.

In her February 2, 2008, Washington Post column entitled Why I'm Backing Obama, Susan Eisenhower -- yes, that Eisenhower, Ike's granddaughter and stalwart continuation of his ideas -- made a bold statement that were he to win the nomination, she would back Barack Obama. Not only did she endorse him, she just left the Republican Party.

From that February column:

+++++++++
"I am not alone in worrying that my generation will fail to do what my grandfather's did so well: Leave America a better, stronger place than the one it found.
...
It is in this great tradition of crossover voters that I SUPPPORT BARACK OBMAMA'A CANDIDACY FOR PRESIDENT. If the Democratic Party chooses Obama as its candidate, this lifelong Republican will work to get him elected and encourage him to seek strategic solutions to meet America's greatest challenges. To be successful, our president will need bipartisan help." [my bold]
++++++++

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/01/AR2008020102621.html

And yesterday:

+++++
"I have decided I can no longer be a registered Republican. For the first time in my life I announced my support for a Democratic candidate for the presidency, in February of this year.
...
My decision came at the end of last week when it was demonstrated to the nation that McCain and this Bush White House have learned little in the last five years. They mishandled what became a crisis in the Caucusus, and this has undermined U.S. national security.
++++

Susan Eisenhower has re-registered as an independent.

www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=19618

Ms Eisenhower has always remained pragmatic and fully tied to her grandfather's beliefs and warnings about the military-industrial complex. She was an old-school Republican: thrifty, cautious, *conservative*, an empty adjective the GOP continues to label itself with despite their policies and actions being anything but.

************

Compare and contrast Nixon's Checkers speech with the wealth of the Republicans who have followed him and who now can't even remember how much money and property they have:

"...Pat doesn't have a mink coat. But she does have a respectable Republican cloth coat..."

www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/richardnixoncheckers.html

But that's nothing. Compare McCain's admission to being influenced by lobbyists:

"I believe that there are times that I have probably been influenced because the big donor, er, buys access to my office, and we know that access is influence."

www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgq5I8l6h7E

To Nixon's speech:

"And third, let me point out -- and I want to make this particularly clear -- that no contributor to this fund, no contributor to any of my campaigns, has ever received any consideration that he would not have received as an ordinary constituent. I just don't believe in that, and I can say that never, while I have been in the Senate of the United States, as far as the people that contributed to this fund are concerned, have I made a telephone call for them to an agency, or have I gone down to an agency in their behalf. And the records will show that, the records which are in the hands of the administration."

Maybe we don't need the low-info voters as much as we think we do. Maybe we just need some of the higher-profile GOPers to cut their ties to a party which, having been OVERTAKEN by fundamentalists and fear-mongers, has lost its way and has as much claim to the word "CONSERVATIVE" as does a professional prostitute to the word "virginity".

Alright.

I am going to have to lay the law down.

peace

Its funny to see some Deepak critics who are calling for "balance" in his political views using the "fair and balanced" standards akin to Fox News. And no wonder they use standard GOP pseudo-intellectual talking points.

You know you can't balance your bad arguments or (lack of arguments) with good vocabulary and "civility."

Not surprisingly, some people see "reason" where there is none.

Here's some truth: America is pro-choice, have any questions?

Is anyone still unsure where We the People stand on choice? That right-wing noise machine is effective, listening to the concerted buzz of Fake News and talking puppet heads, it's easy to think reproductive choice is a shrinking minority. But according to a recent Gallup poll, we are in the majority by a long shot, and have been since the poll was founded over ten years ago.

www.gallup.com/poll/1576/Abortion.aspx

Couple of tidbits:

"* Most Americans oppose the idea of passing laws to outlaw abortion and they soundly reject the idea of overturning Roe. v. Wade.

* More broadly, a majority of Americans favor keeping abortion legal in the first trimester but would make it illegal in the second and third trimesters."

Only about 20% or less of those polled over the last decade feel abortion should be illegal in all cases -- the only possible, rational conclusion for anyone who truly believes that a viable embryo at any stage of development is a person with full constitutional rights. Almost two thirds of the sample want restrictions to remain the same or be further loosened. A little over half of those polled do not want to see "Roe V. Wade" overturned while less than a third want it overturned.

The data goes on and on like this. And what's remarkable about these numbers is how consistent they've remained for more than a decade of polling. Anti-choice talking points have been liberally poured into the nation's conscious for twenty or thirty years, backed by almost limitless political, religious, and financial resources. The net result of all that right-wing effort is at best maybe a few, scattered points here and there on the margins.

That explains why the most extreme right-wing control freaks in almost a century were notably less than eager to eliminate choice. Tax breaks for billionaires, sweetheart deals for Big Oil, protection for communist sweat shop owners, all sailed through--as rightly pointed put by Deepak Chopra--Tom DeLay's House of Horrors, and Bill Frist's Senate, as fast as American jobs sailed overseas. But that same crew of sanctimonious blowhards didn’t even try to put up anything other than a token effort to end what they referred to as *mass infanticide*, they didn’t try even when they had control of both branches of Congress, the Supreme Court, and the White House. They know damn well it was 1) unpopular, and 2) too useful an issue politically to risk losing. Whatever else we disagree with the socially conservative right on, (and it's quite a long list,) this is one thing we can recognize: they got royally screwed by the Republicans. The question is, do they finally recognize it, and if so, what are they going to do about it?

Ref. 17. Tom DeLay's protection for communist sweat shop owners:

The real scandal of Tom DeLay
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/09/real.delay/

High Strangeness Obama and McCain political ads.

Watching the random political adds showing up on http://illusions.me it first appears to be an Obama or McCain ad but then a few strange twists leaves one wondering did the Obama campaign do an ad for McCain and the McCain campaign do an ad for Obama? Or is it some others? Which is fitting because the page is about illusions and creating appearances.

Are some creating the appearance of being from a certain source only to disparage in subtle ways?

Since the ads can come up either Obama or McCain and it is random, what determines which add comes up the viewer consciousness, a mysterious force?

Einstein said God doesn't play dice with the universe. Which means everything happens for an intelligent reason. So is the Universe choosing what each individual sees? Are you subconsciously choosing?

How does one interpret seeing a candidate show up on the page for illusions? Good or Bad?

My mind reminds that we do not need to choose good or bad. It simply is...

Yet I wonder if we could say resonant and not resonant.

When we speak of different frequencies we are not really creating a duality are we?

Just different speeds?

In physics, resonance is the tendency of a system to oscillate at maximum amplitude at certain frequencies, known as the system's resonance frequencies (or resonant frequencies). At these frequencies, even small periodic driving forces can produce large amplitude vibrations, because the system stores vibrational energy.

If the whole system GAIA or even the human body has a resonant frequency then some things would not be a match.

So instead of saying good or bad we might say it doesn’t match my resonant frequencies?

Now what if our feelings were actually a measure of frequency within?

Could we use things to artificially alter them?

Could a disturbing truth be altered by embracing a fiction to alleviate it?

Post#17 John

Is anyone still unsure where We the People stand on choice? ~John

What do you mean "we the people"? I for one was never asked or even given a chance to vote on the matter. So your statement "we the people" must mean you and the voices in your head.

"Here's some truth: America is pro-choice, have any questions"~John

What truth? There's no truth here. America is not pro-choice. A few liberal-lame activist judges are the ones who made the decision for pro-choice for the us. I for one am not pro-choice. The only choice I would be in favor of is the CHOICE a woman should make before she decides to engage in the act that can produce another human being. That CHOICE being what contraceptive should she use, birth control pills,condoms, any number of the many across the counter products, or (god forbid) abstinence. Abortion should not be the lazy liberal lames way out. Choice for abortion should only be allowed in cases of rape or incest,or serious damage to the mother's physical health. In these cases there are health issues to be considered. People should take full responsibility for their actions. However the liberal lames mantra is "By all means don't take responsibility for any wrong action and be sure and send someone else the bill!"

Anyway I could hardly make heads or tails of your rant. What was your point?

Much compassion~paulisoso

Dear Paulisoso,

Thank you so much for speaking out for Pro-life America. The majority of the population is definitely against the annihilation of God-given life for unjustifiable reason. As you say, abortion is not justified because of it being the course of least resistance. The problem is the lack of awareness of the divine purpose behind the act of creation and the absence of the respect one should have for its importance. There is no respect given for the sanctity of life. As you say, "The liberal lame mantra is- 'By all means don't take responsibility for any wrong action and be sure and send someone else the bill'."

It is another reason for concern that Obama has voted against a bill that would protect the lives of babies which are a result of failed abortions.

Regarding some of Tipper's comments: that "media matters was one the groups to condemn Corsi's book". Media Matters is a known liberal group, so what else would you expect? Also, "there was a resounding repudiation by the mainstream media". The media has already proven that they never present a balanced or impartial view of happenings for the public to consider.

With some people you can try to reason until you are blue in the face but, they will not be able to recognize the truth even when it hits them in the face.

Best Wishes,

"Betsy" S.

Dear Paulisoso and others,

Have you heard the latest weird twist in this presidential battle? Just when you think you've heard the ultimate in bizarre reports - along comes another.

If you wish to read about the controversy over the legality of Obama's U. S. citizenship, there is an article from the July 7, 2008 issue of "The American Free Press" Newspaper. Search google with: Obama ineligible for office of president? Drudge Retort.

Wonder what is coming next.

Best Wishes,

"Betsy" S.

Capitalism is, the very nature of capitalism is, inequality: this is why dead wood (and now simply numbers on a screen) is/are used to offset the perceived difference in the exchange of goods and services. I would have to write an in depth essay to fully explicate how socialism would work; so I will have to post that at some future time.

Nevertheless, true socialism has yet been attempted in this world, as true socialism is now only possible with the technology we have: that being, instant communication that makes centralization of decision-makers an irrelevant danger. In a truly democratic society there is no need for our representatives to gather themselves in Washington D.C. or even in every states’ respective capitol. There is no distinction between government and citizen either; for every citizen is part of the government.

This is why the age of nation-states will have to be dissolved before we could ever have a truly just society, b/c if every citizen is part of the government, then there can be no aspects of our society that can be hidden from others (such as the government having secret military bases and operations, or even spying on us, purportedly for our own good): because if there are secrets there is diabolical injustice! I mean most adulterers don’t tell their spouse about their secret love affairs, unless you think adultery is a “good” secret to keep (on doing: har har har). But outside of a “secret” birthday party, I think secrets only lead to death.

People worry about their credit card and banking security, but they have no qualms about the government knowing every aspect of their “private” lives, and this is plainly silly. You don’t want your neighbor to know how much you are worth, but if a government full of lawyers and businesspersons do then it is all good?!? Ridiculous!

We have much more to fear from a body of persons separated from us, who can keep secrets, start wars, and “legally” kill us, than we do from each other!

An equitable distribution of resources sounds more ominous than it actually is; firstly, it is not truly distributing resources than it simply is making resources available to everybody. What does anybody need 5, 6, 10, 100, etc., houses for? For what purpose does a person need a collection of Rolls Royces in some security-patrolled garage? They cannot physically occupy these houses or cars at the same time. This is a profound injustice and truly a waste of resources! Why should the government be able to charge us for vacationing in state/federal parks? Is this not “our” land? But then again, even if your house is paid for, you pay property taxes. Is this just?

Because somebody had the privilege of becoming a dentist, scientist, or doctor, does not make them worth more as a human being than the person serving you french fries. fixing your toilet, or working on our streets; it only shows they had the money, or good fortune, and mayhap genetic inclination, to become an expert in such areas: and their God-given ability should be cherished and put into use to benefit the common good of us all and not just their selves.

Gates builds a computer, other people manufacture it for him, other people distribute it. No money at all needs to change hands. He was having fun enough being a puter geek as a kid, having enough money to buy half of Seattle is needless and ridiculous. And he can take a month out of the year to clamber around the Tetons as can the dude serving fries.

The biggest lie the American populace has been sold is that monetary reward promotes industry; and in fact, only the greatest of evil can occur if a person, or group of persons, seek to do anything only if fame and fortune will be theirs. But the people owning the TV stations, newspapers, and half of Montana have tirelessly indoctrinated us with this notion, because they have had the money to set our political, domestic, and international agenda. A library named after a rich dude does nobody any good except his ego, but the books inside the library are invaluable and should be available right here on the internet!

I know capitalism and greed have passed the point of no return. But the truth is Jesus would not charge me for a sandwich, nor would he charge to heal me of cancer either. At least it does not indicate in Scripture Jesus charging the poor and sick for his services, if he did somebody left that part out. Maybe that is (one of the reasons) why he made the Jewish priests so mad, what they preached for a fee he preached for free . . .

Anyway, in this “great Christian nation” our politicians incessantly vow that we are, I do not see many people, well none actually, living Christ-like lives. All I hear is a bunch of judging, and all I see is an overabundance of hypocrisy.

Like I said I didn’t get into particulars because that would be a book, but if you want a “rough draft” the New Testament, Isaiah, Genesis, and Deuteronomy would be a great place to start!

pax vobiscum

Illusions aren't real, so we can do anything that we want with them :-) ... make them round or maybe a square?

Love, Char

Kali

PS: You do know that we are in charge of our own vibration ... don't you? At will, one can lower or raise the vibration ... whatever is the game or pleasure at any level desired.

Reality never changes, nor can it. Reality is the truth, which is eternal.

"Dear Paulisoso and others,

Have you heard the latest weird twist in this presidential battle? Just when you think you've heard the ultimate in bizarre reports - along comes another.

If you wish to read about the controversy over the legality of Obama's U. S. citizenship, there is an article from the July 7, 2008 issue of "The American Free Press" Newspaper. Search google with: Obama ineligible for office of president? Drudge Retort.

Wonder what is coming next.

Best Wishes,

"Betsy" S.

25. Posted by "Betsy" S. [TypeKey Profile Page] on August 23, 2008 01:53 PM
*****************************************

Yeah, no wonder more crap will come from Drudge gossip and viral email smears.

No wonder Jerome Corsi is so wrong about everything. He gets his information from the conspiracy-theorist PUMA- and Obama-hating fringe online. But if we needed another reason why Corsi should be considered nothing more than a discredited buffoon, here we have it.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/154599

Quote:

"In June, the Obama campaign released a digitally scanned image of his birth certificate to quell speculative charges that he might not be a natural-born citizen. But the image prompted more blog-based skepticism about the document's authenticity. And recently, author Jerome Corsi, whose book attacks Obama, said in a TV interview that the birth certificate the campaign has is "fake."

We beg to differ. FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted high-resolution photographs of the document as "supporting documents" to this article. Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said."

Personally, it's been hilarious watching this fringe obsess over Obama's birth certificate. As long as they were chasing that red herring, they couldn't do anything legitimately damaging. Lucky for us, this FactCheck.org conclusion won't stop the conspiracy theories. In fact, it's given them a whole new batch of document scans to pore over, loose pixels to obsess about, and fantastical theories to develop.

PS. Also, its amazing to read hypocrisy laden media bias cries from people who get their fair and balanced "news" from Drudge.

Eric Boehlert at Media Matters notes that Jerome Corsi hasn't been getting much traction with his anti-Obama smear book, in notable contrast to his anti-Kerry smear book four years ago. This time around, Corsi's been getting much more critical coverage.

http://mediamatters.org/columns/200808190001

Eric attributes this to the new progressive infrastructure that can knock the stuffing out of lies like Corsi's as soon as they appear, and on the media itself deciding this time around that "fact-checking" and "balance" are not, in fact, mortally opposed concepts. I agree both those things have been playing small positive roles, but I'm skeptical that either will last longer than Jerome Corsi's current book tour. In the end, I think Corsi's only been getting hammered primarily because in the last four years, he's been demonstrated to be a complete whack job, and news figures are now embarrassed to be around him.

Consider Corsi's recent obsessions: Corsi thinks Bush is conspiring with the evil Canadians and Mexicans to form one combined nation with combined currency and great freeway access. He thinks 9/11 was accomplished via explosives planted in the building. He's built up a truly spectacular online collection of conspiracy theories, falsehoods, and general all-around nuttiness, being a go-to guy for all sorts of asinine far-right bugaboos.

So when Corsi starts blathering on about another presidential candidate, this time with "secret Muslim" claims, etc., etc., you'd really have to be one of the biggest idiots in the country to give him much credit. No matter how badly you want to smear Obama, Mr. North American Union, da Mexicans are coming, we're-all-gonna-die Corsi has lost his luster, the last few years. Mind you he still has advocates, people like Mary Matalin and the Fox News heads -- people who long ago lost any ability to feel shame, and who cater to the very same collection of the gullible and the paranoid. But the larger dynamic faced by Corsi, perhaps, is media humiliation. This guy, this obvious nutcase got a treasure-trove of media coverage four years ago for his asinine Kerry claims, but how stupid would a reporter have to be to take it all at face value, again, after Corsi's solidified his own reputation as someone just one rubber foot shy of a bigfoot claim? I'm thinking there are no small number of producers and reporters who feel embarrassed by their past acts, and want a wee bit of payback against this guy who played them -- quite easily -- for chumps.

Here's the thing, though: I see Corsi's negative coverage as the media rejecting the messenger, not the mechanism of the message. If someone not already certifiably batty were to come up with similarly scandalous but unproven claims, I don't see much evidence that the media, sensing "scoop", would not immediately run with the story, leaving questions of credibility and accuracy by the wayside in exchange for a few weeks of something to talk about on the cable shows. The possibility of "swiftboating" Obama still exists, but it will have to come from different messengers: say, an knowledgeable-sounding someone obsessed with Obama's birth certificate, thinking it really shows him to be an alien from the planet Moslemia VII, or a wingnut with "important but secret Chicago connections" linking Obama to Jimmy Hoffa's disappearance, or zebra mussels, or Eruca sativa training camps.

With the advent of "news as entertainment", the drive for scandal has always superseded the need for accuracy, and the tendency of pundits to categorize all events into the same set of common narratives cannot be overstated. Corsi's being left out, this time around, because he managed to do the near-impossible, for a wingnut: humiliate himself. Color me unconvinced, though, that this heralds any broader good news for the upcoming silly season.

Obama can't ask for juice or visit his own grandmother without being "exotic": the willingness to bend the meaning of acts into whatever the Republican press releases say they represent is still very alive and well. I'll be happy to believe that Corsi's treatment heralds a difference in how smearmongers are treated in the press, but only when I see it happen against figures other than Corsi.

Deepak:

"...a modified capitalism." I'm not sure we can use the same terms. It's like old bottles being filled with new wine.

Perhaps in Barcelona, November 7-9, new terms will emerge that align crystal energy with outer forms and systems.

Oneness emerges...and with that new language. Let's get boldly creative and project that into our world.

Trish~~

Post#23&24... Betsy, Thanks for taking the time to share.

Post# 26
"Capitalism is, the very nature of capitalism is, inequality:~empyrius

Dude, in case you haven't notice there is nothing equal in this world, not in nature, not relative to people and certainly not in society. That is because all people do not produce equally, and there are many different reasons for that, some lack the mental acuity, some are flat out lazy and yes it is true some don't have the opportunity. However that is not the case here in American, even those from the poorest of families have the opportunity to a free education on through college.
I think you have a total misunderstanding of what you think socialism is. You seem to think socialism is where the have's are made to share with the have-nots. This is not socialism. Socialism is a system whereby the producers, large and small(there are no non-producers, the state kills them off as need be)give all that they produce to the state, then the state decides how that wealth is to be distributed, of course the most wealth will be kept by the state and those higher ups who run the state.
I can tell you that this does not give the individual incentive to produce much of anything.

The reason in a capitalistic society we produce so much is because of incentive(profit-motive). And please don't give me that crap about cancer,aids,etc...-
curing drugs not being avalible for the poor, bologna!!!! I have had numerous friends who could not afford their aids drugs, not only were they given their drugs free, they were given SSI and foodstamps. Likewise with my friend who has CML.All of their drugs run about $5,000 each a month. Try getting that shit in any other country. The US taxpayer is paying for that. Also have you ever heard of MEDICAID, MEDICARE, SSI SOCIAL SECUITY, PELL GRANTS, GOVT.GURANTEED EDUCATIONAL LOANS, FOODSTAMPS, SEC 8, MOD-REHAB,UTILITY CHECKS, FHA, HUD HOUSING, GOVT FUNDED DOWN PAYMENT ASSITANCE PROGRAMS? This is just name a few.
Anyway dude why don't you try putting you effort and energy into something that would be benificial if not to all then at least to yourself.

Capitalism is still the best trip going.

Much compassion~paulisoso

Aye paulisoso methinks the term “socialism” that I utilize denotes past governmental experiments in disaster, and I should implement a more genuine term in “Jesusianism.”

Gotta keep those “isms” after all . . . :)

First of all no killing is necessary since every person is the state.

There is no “state” removed from us; hence the previously mentioned evilness of secrets.

We would still have a representative body, as I have explained in-depth in “essays” such as "The Republic: A 21st Century Odyssey," and, "Odd Blogballs (Or: The Five Dime Geeks who Saved the World)," and others ad nauseam; and our representatives, instead of finding ways to spend money and pass laws, would simply be the administers of our intent as one would imagine a representative would be.

We could call our representatives truly what they are: decentralized planners. Money-less middlepersons who simply direct our collective intention of literally spreading the wealth: the gospel of Jesus put into action!

I absolutely agree that the profit motive is why a capitalist society produces so much, conversely I am loathe to imagine what a society impelled by an altruistic motive could produce. I declare that it may produce far more material abundance than this world, and its inhabitants, hath ever known. Now the only problem we have is altruism being our individual and collective motivating force other than the inherent “selfishness” so many seem to believe guides our behavior. Indeed, I believe, that if humanity does possess a spirit, is “ensouled,” as preached in theological circles; then we should be able to work as One in our collective struggle against our-selves in this world.

One need not come into this life alone and die alone, when we realize that none is born alone and we all die as One. Call it, the physical reversal of One dying for us all. Individually we compete, for profit even, and then die, but collectively if we cooperated, we can always live on as One, as One ensouled species would. Money is a tool for possession, for selfishness, yet our spirit possesses nothing at all: but us! The spirit of humanity, of God, was not born in 1776, 1789, or 1967, but maybe Spirit more vigorously descended 33 A.D. (or thereabouts), and we are just now starting to better understand 2000 years hence: now in the eternal present.

So that is basically the crux of it. If we do in fact possess a spirit, an immaterial knowledge of our Creator and sustainer, and Redeemer, then our souls have already been purchased with more money than “we” could ever manufacture. Now we just have to one day pay back spirit in kind.

The Word throughout Scripture declares this will one day happen. Some believe it will be a great battle in Israel, and some think the Messiah shall literally descend from the sky, as some fear a powerful Anti-Christ figure will rise up in the world that is physically vanquished by the Messiah. I believe a remnant of humanity, an entire generation of the world willing as One, shall one day universally proclaim the Holy One of Israel our Redeemer, freeing us of the material trifles of trade and differentiation and greedy egos of competition that has always been the Anti-Christ within us all. As middlemen profit by sealing the deal between seller and buyer, producer and consumer, Jesus is the middleman between God and us, as he physically modeled the divine ideal, something all the money in the world could not buy and in truth without money will be redeemed, humanity’s divinity: Spirit in physical action.

A white banner shall unfurl announcing the birth of the Republic, and our spiritual journey shall have just begun.

Aye friend, it shall come to pass . . .

peace

Post#34

empyrius...
My friend, I very much enjoyed the read, thank you for taking the time to respond. I think perhaps it is I who misunderstood your previous post.
empyrius~ "Indeed, I believe, that if humanity does possess a spirit, is “ensouled,” as preached in theological circles; then we should be able to work as One in our collective struggle against our-selves in this world."

I totally agree with this statement so beautifully expressed.

I assume by Republic you mean
Republic,
"group with collective interests: a group of people who are considered to be equals and who have a collective interest, objective, or vocation. "
Likewise it now appears to me what you decribe if possible to implement would result in more of a Utopia rather than a socialist society.
Whatever, I like the idea and the ideal, yup, I likes it alot!

Much compassion~paulisoso

Awesome paulisoso!

That is definitely the Republic!

One day.

peace

Dear Paulisoso and Empyrius,

Thank you so much, Paulisoso, for the comprehensive explanation of Socialism in Posting No.33 and Empyrius, for the more detailed description of the "idealistic form of Socialism" envisioned by you in Posting No.34.

As Empyrius says, "Our representatives, instead of finding ways to spend money and pass laws, would simply be ADMINISTERS OF OUR INTENT AS ONE WOULD IMAGINE A REPRESENTATIVE WOULD BE. Your premise assumes that our representatives would be inspired by moral integrity to abide by the consensus will of the people. The mass awareness of humanity has certainly not grown enough spiritually at this stage of its development to enable the implementation of such a "dream".

Hopefully, this "dream" will materialize in the not too distant future as our collective consciousness is raised.

Best Wishes,

"Betsy" S.

Betsy#37
"Hopefully, this "dream" will materialize in the not too distant future as our collective consciousness is raised." :)

I too hope.~paulisoso

empyrius#36
My friend, You have started the thought. :)

Kant said- the reason man does not perceive a fourth dimension is because he cannot conceive of a fourth dimension.
Well we are pass that now.

Much compassion~paulisoso

Faith

Hope

Love

Are they simply chemical reactions of the brain, or are they disembodied realities?

I'm thinking they do not actually exist, but my imagination is just consoling my mortal angst.

Michelle Obama was very lucky having such a mom and dad; I wish we could give all of our children such love and opportunity.

The children dying right now unheard . . .

peace