A post by Maynard
You’ve heard Obama’s proclamation that America isn’t defined by borders. This might make sense in a broad philosophical contemplation, but it’s weird and dangerous when uttered in the context of a speech addressing the real problem of illegal immigration.
I haven’t heard anyone comment on the irony of the second part of Obama’s sentence: “In the 21st century, we are defined not by our borders, but by our bonds.”
Look up “bonds” in the dictionary:
The first definition:
1: something that binds or restrains : fetter
You know, as in “bondage”. That certainly captures the spirit of the era. I guess Obama would say he didn’t mean it that way; he meant the fourth definition:
4: a uniting or binding element or force : tie (the bonds of friendship)
…although Obama doesn’t seem to be doing much to unite or bind us; he’s proving more of a divider.
The fifth definition is another scary reminder of what is to be Obama’s legacy:
5 a: an obligation made binding by a money forfeit; also : the amount of the money guarantee; c: an interest-bearing certificate of public or private indebtedness
Our children will be paying off Obama’s bonds long after he’s gone.
I suppose we can’t read too much into this. But I thought it was worth mentioning.
I like the first picture: the stocks. It is another word with both an economic and penal definition. If the current administration has it’s way, a private citizen owning the first would lead to the second.
I would like to return the favor to all the polititians including Ovomit who have shackled me with debt! This is just a start – INSTANT TERM LIMITS : We need a law prohibiting any elected official or representative from posessing, collecting, receiving or spending Campain donations or funds while holding office! If the office holder resigns during the term of the office, they will be ineligeble to run for office the next election. We have to do something! And throw in a 10 year prison sentence for something while your at it.
phil
He is although attempting in uniting specific groups; muslims, illegals, hispanics, blacks against other people who are becoming bound in the process. He has certainly divided this country apart like no other. He is insinuating that we all become one by integrating his hive with everyone else who is in opposition thereby attempting to create a complete falsification of individual freedoms declaring that it is simply based on selfishness and greed, the opposition is nothing more than those who owe something to everyone else in the entire world. Those who simply refuse to exceed their own grasp but instead expect it to be retrieved from someone else by way of an entitlement, what they do not seem to ‘grasp’ is what is to be achieved to begin with in and of itself is based on earning it due to ambition, drive, determination, and self love, evidently void within those seeking the theft of someone else’s grasp. American exceptionalness is persecuted yet coveted, (they hate what someone else has, yet they want it for themselves) for those who excel and exceed their own grasp are defined and determined from the left as being self absorbed, conceited and selfish; this is quite simply a horrific way of attempting in destroying man at his best, it is simply self love, and self respect the desire to create and build through passion and the marvel of one’s own existence, whereby what they create is represented by their love of living and being alive and sharing it with those who appreciate and honor it, not tear it down and steal it and claim it as their own entitlement, entitled in what way? They want what you have, yet they hate it when you have it.
Interesting Maynard, good catch, thank you
while the punks were reveling in nazi and S/M imagery- only one person called it all out for what it was- the ‘ fascinating fascism’ of susan sontag . that she was a she who happened to be of mixed race added to the impact of her condemnation as does a black man speechifying of the liberation of bonds, only in the opposite manner. why does a supposed black man, the wife of whom is apparently descended from slaves, want america to be bonded ideologically to a country for which racism against indigenous people defines most of their political and social agenda?
everyday he inspires more disgust as do the congress creatures who refuse to stand up to him- or is it rather they are just exactly like him anyway? the constitution is meant to be binding to government- fetters upon federal legislative and executive power. it’s apparent urkel feels we the people, the judiciary and the legislature should be fettered to His will alone and not the founding documents and actual laws of our country.
polystyrene and x-ray spex- oh bondage, up yours!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogypBUCb7DA
That is a good catch, Maynard, but as far as Urkel is concerned, you have no crediblity. He said just that to Stephanopoulos when he tried to use the dictionary to inform Urkel that “taxes” and “fees” are basically the same thing.