The Union Address: Asked, I Responded

What are my thoughts?

You know, I did read it and thanks for posting it by the way. I had heard some disturbing things and wanted to give it a once over. I confess, I didn't give it my fullest attention as I did a lot of skimming. Skimming in itself denotes a lot of bullshit to wade through, I would think - or at least not the kind of substance that I'd like to hear.

On the surface, it appears to say a lot of good and valuable things: Social responsibility, medicaid, not leaving children behind, and therein lies his argument for "staying the course." This is where he segues gradually into the war on terror. I don't doubt that there are extremists, after all, North American churches are full of them too. So there may be some valid points to the threats that exist to the advancement of freedom and democracy in the middle-east. We've certainly seen enough evidence of that in both of our lifetimes.

This is where there is a fundamental flaw though. Terrorists and extremists alike, are simply misinformed, brainwashed, socially conditioned beasts themselves - tied up in the prison of their own beliefs.Sure we can fight them, and in fighting them we can continue to reinforce their beliefs. It's hard to see how there is a win-win in that given scenario. So then, how to bring about change?

This is where the UN and Canada have traditionally had fundamental differences in our approach from the US. Canada has sent (in the past anyway) more peace-keeping troops per capita to other parts of the world since the inception of the UN than any other nation. It's the role we're all intended to keep - Peace-keepers - not war-mongers. This is where I found the economic growth and job creation in the US mentioned in the Union Address to be rather interesting facts that he introduced.

War is apparently a great money-maker for business. Business does well, more jobs are available, unemployment is down (soldiers are dead though - an irony buried in there), even though government spending on military is up. Take a look at other intelligent responses by Democrat House Members, and the disparity between the growth of income for top-earners and the average American and you begin to see how radically this so-called boon to the economy is out of balance with reality. Good for business, sure, but not so good for the average Joe and Jane.

So, it is all a bit complex and over my head on many levels. Isn't that interesting too though? It seems that the "system" has been designed in such a way as to keep people in the dark. Heck, even Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton said as much when they wanted to find the truth about UFO's and the history of research within the government system. Both were apparently told "You don't want to go there." and they were not permitted to go there. The Presidents, not allowed access to information within their own government bureaucracy!

I've missed something I'm sure - in the point I was trying to get to as well. That word bureaucracy ties me up with getting the spelling right just as badly as the system of it ties people and freedoms in knots too.

So what should be done differently? Well, once your in the fire, I think the fire-fighting has to continue. You got in and stirred the pot, have done a lot of damage, so pulling out now would be like going to your neighbor's house and tearing the foundation to shreds while trying to get rid of rot. Then when you see how badly you've mucked it up, you back off and leave your neighbor to fend for himself. Not a good policy. Now I don't ascribe to taking it any further either. I say quell what is there now, establish peace, the rest of the world needs to get into the peace-keeping role, and someone please start building bridges of education, understanding, and diplomacy to the process again!

I still liked what Gandhi said once about Jesus' teaching about turning the other cheek. Gandhi said something to the effect, "I'm not sure he meant that we were to turn away. I believe he meant that we are to offer our other cheek. In that way, we earn the respect of our adversary and from there real progress can be made. To strike back simply affirms them in their wrongful convictions."