Hold the phone, let me back up here.

The other night when my partner and I were at the airport, we had dinner at Chili’s while we waited for our next flight. All of a sudden, my partner said, “Ohmygosh, that’s James Carville!” Sure enough, it was. And he was sitting right beside us, presumably with his wife. They didn’t say a word to each other the whole time, so I’m pretty sure it was Mary (teehee). Anywho - they were both reading, and I wasn’t going to bother them, though I WANTED to ask, “So, James - why DID you stab Hillary in the back? Just wondering!” Ahem.

Then, we were making our way down the concourse to our next flight. My partner very kindly was getting me a beverage (iced latte with an extra shot, if you must know - yes, I am one of those who are addicted to fancy coffee drinks. I prefer cappuccinos, myself, and have my very own espresso machine which I use daily. A lot. And Peet’s is my brand, but they don’t have those here on the East Coast, so Starbucks it was. Aren’t you glad I shared?). I noticed these two men walking past me, and as the light dawned, I realized one of them was my old seminary professor, Cornel West (his companion looked like someone with whom I went to seminary). Yep, there he went, one of the premier philosophers of our time. Okey dokey, a trip down Memory Lane for me, but so what? I’ll get to that soon.

First, just a little background on Cornel West. Some of you may know him from one of his books, Race Matters, which propelled him into the national spotlight. That book was followed by Democracy Matters. He taught at Union Theological Seminary for a while, and is now at Princeton. This excellent article, Imagining Social Justice: Cornel West’s Prophectic Public Intellectualism, by Gary Darrien, also a professor at Union, is a great resource on Cornel West, and includes much of his history, in terms of his upbringing, his intellectual pursuits (he attended Harvard for his undergrad, and was admitted to the doctoral program in Philosophy at Princeton at the age of TWENTY), and how he came to be at Union:

By the mid-1970s West was already acquiring a reputation as an intellectual spellbinder. The first time that I saw him, in 1975, he had attracted a sidewalk crowd of a dozen people at Harvard Divinity School and was expounding exuberantly on the varieties of black nationalism. The crowd got larger as passersby judged, as I had, “That must be Cornel West.” Two years later he began his teaching career at Union Theological Seminary, which seemed to him the perfect home for his broad intellectual and activist interests.

“You know, my aim was always to teach at Union Seminary,” he later recalled. “Union Seminary, for me, was the real institutional site that brought together all of my interests. It was a Christian seminary, it was deeply shaped by progressive politics, Marxism, feminism, antihomophobic thought and black liberation theology.”

West continued about his decision to teach at Union:

“I decided to teach at Union Seminary for three reasons: It was (and still is) the center of liberation theology in the country; it was one of the best places for black theological education in the country; and it allowed me to teach and read widely in philosophy, social theory, history, literary criticism and cultural thought. Union was the perfect place to become a broadly engaged cultural critic with a strong grounding in the history of philosophy and criticism.”

That’s my alma mater! I took several classes with Professor West, and remember well an exchange that happened in one of his classes. But to set the stage, I was the Student Senate Rep from the Lesbian/Gay Caucus all three years of the M.Div. program, and was completely out. At some point in the classroom discussion the topic of which I cannot recall, I said, “Oh, for God’s sake,” to which one of the African American students in the class looked at me, and said, “for whose sake?” in such a way, and in context with the discussion that clearly implied I was not in a position to call on God given my sexual orientation. That pissed me off, needless to say. I got up and walked out. Another student, and African American woman, came after me to talk about it. We were sitting in the Student Union when class let out, and Cornel West came over to see why I had left class. After I explained to him what happened (he couldn’t hear it where he was), he just lowered his head, shook it, and said, “We have such a long way to go.” He didn’t just talk the talk about “antihomophobic thought,” he walked it, too.

Imagine my surprise then, when I read this:

(West) replied that it should be possible to defend the progressive possibilities of heterosexual marriage from a feminist and egalitarian standpoint without being accused of bigotry against gays, lesbians, and single parents. Repeating a central argument of his book on the family, West contended that children did best when raised by two biological parents that were married to each other. The empirical evidence on this point was terribly clear, and important, he urged. To set progressivism against it was disastrous for progressivism and for children: “We make it clear that this does not stigmatize single mothers and fathers, disqualify loving gay or lesbian parents, or preclude successful adoption of children.” He took no interest in bolstering discrimination against gay or lesbian parents. Progressivism had to be against that, just as it had to “put a premium on the well-being of children.”

Huh - that sounds a whole lot like McCain’s response to the Washington Blade the other day in response to a question on adoption. I admit I was a little surprised by West’s response. It is hard to reconcile his statement with the man who was upset by how I was treated in his classroom. Just goes to show that McCain’s position is not all that unique, even in progressive circles.

As I mentioned above, this is not just a trip down Memory Lane for me. You may recall that Larry Johnson had an excellent piece in No Quarter entitled, “Barack Obama’s Revolutionary Buddies,” in which he mentioned “Progressives for Obama.” Wanna take a guess who one of those Progressives are? Yep, you got it, Cornel West. He was one of those listed from this organization.

Now I should add, and the article from which I have been quoting is quite clear, that West is a socialist. Here is more from Prof. Dorrien’s excellent piece (bear with the introduction of two other socialists - it helps for the context):

Harrington was eloquent about the structural injustices of capitalism, but he passed over its equally devastating operations on the cultural level.

That was never true of West, who emphasized cultural criticism, writing about popular music, television, sexuality, identity politics, black culture, white supremacism, the culture of nihilism, and the cultural limitations of progressive organizations dominated by whites. West’s pamphlet for DSA, “Toward a Socialist Theory of Racism,” was a signature statement for him and the organization. (Emphasis mine.) Stressing the Marxist bias of most American socialist theorizing about racism, West delineated four main types. The first viewed racism as an epiphenomenon of the class struggle, subsuming racial injustice under the general rubric of working class exploitation. Eugene Debs, an icon of this approach, had a simple answer to the question of what socialism offered blacks: “Nothing, except socialism.” Debs took for granted that racism was a divide-and-conquer ruse of the ruling class. To him, a socialist revolution was the only solution to racial injustice and all other social evils; any solution outside the labor framework was racism in reverse. West acknowledged that Debs, having fought racism bravely, was an honorable example of the color-blind strategy; nonetheless, socialist reductionism was not the answer, since it ignored the complexity of the problem.

And this ties into Matthew Weaver’s outstanding piece, “Obama Is Hiding A Radical Past,” in which he details Barack Obama’s membership in the DSA, and its implications for this election. If you have not read it, I highly recommend it to you.

I have to say, though, in full disclosure, that Professor West originally supported Hillary Clinton. Check out this video from the State of Black America and his challenges to Obama’s ability (major H/T to WasLn, etc., for leading me to the New Zealand site, another one at which real investigation into Obama’s Socialist ties is taking place):

Too bad he didn’t leave it at that. Check out this video and how he introduces Obama (again, H/T to the New Zealand site):

Oh, dear. “Comrade”? Um, yeah. The evidence is quickly mounting that, indeed, Obama is a Socialist, and a card-carrying one at that. Now, I freely admit that I have socialistic tendencies insofar as I am a firm believer in sharing the wealth with those who are less fortunate - I think that is a biblical mandate. And, you would most likely win a game of Monopoly with me (”oh, you need some money? Here, take some of mine!”), but I am not running for president, nor am I a card-carrying member of an official Socialist movement with a capital “S.” There is a difference after all. But, Obama is. And many of his associates are.

I wonder when the MSM is going to pick up THIS story?? So far, it’s looking like NEVER. So the DNC has selected (and I am using that word intentionally) a card-carrying Socialist as the Democratic Presidential Nominee. I wonder how THAT’S gonna play in Kansas? I can tell you that I don’t think it would go over too well here in SC. And that is just the point - the majority of people have no idea that this is the case. Add to that his ties to Black Nationalism as expressed through the rantings of Rev. Jeremiah Wright (and really - since when is a millionnaire considered to be “poor”?), the connection of his church to the Nation of Islam in general, and Louis Farrakhan in particular (not to mention the proximity of Farrakan’s complex to both Ayers’ and Obama’s houses), and it is painting a picture of a man who, at the very LEAST, does not represent the majority of Americans. At most, it has the very real potential of putting a tremendous amount of power in the hands of a man whose mindset would lead us down a dangerous road.

The bottom line is this: Obama continues to be an unknown quantity, with less than a month to go before the election. The vast majority of Americans have NO idea who this man really is, and it seems his handlers have worked very hard to ensure that is the case. But thanks to the efforts of people like Matthew Weaver, Larry Johnson, and New Zeal Research Associates, we are finally learning more. I hope it is not too late…

UPDATE: Alert reader, hadenough, provided documentation that contradicts my claim that Cornel West had been a Clinton supporter before he became an Obama supporter. The information I had was erroneous, and hadenough was correct. It does not change the fundamental issues regarding Obama and his “comrades,” but in the interest of accuracy, I feel it is important to note this change. Here is the LINK to the documentation regarding West’s support of Obama.

Rwanda’s Women Are Leading the Way

I have recently returned from Rwanda. I was last there in 1994, at the height of the genocide that claimed the lives of more than 800,000 Rwandans. The memories of what I saw haunt me still.

I wasn’t sure what to expect all these years later, but I found a country that has found in its deep scars the will to move on and rebuild a civil society. And the renaissance is being led by women.

Women are at the forefront of the physical, emotional and spiritual healing that is moving Rwandan society forward. One of them, from eastern Rwanda, told me her story — a violent, tragic and heartbreaking testimony of courage. She spoke of surviving multiple gang rapes, running at night in fear of losing her life, going days without food or water and witnessing the death of her entire family — one person at a time, before her eyes.

The injuries she sustained left her unable to bear children. Illness, isolation and an utter lack of hope left her in abject despair.

And yet the day I met her, she wasn’t consumed by hatred or resentment. She sat, talking with me and a few others, beside a man who had killed people guilty of nothing more than seeking shelter in a church. She forgave him. She forgave the perpetrators of her tragedy, and she explained her story with hope that such cruelty would never be repeated.

It is a humbling experience to be in the presence of those who have such a capacity for forgiveness and care. It is also instructive. If wealthy nations want their assistance programs to be effective, they should look to the women who form the backbone of every society. With some education, training, basic rights and empowerment, women will transform a society — and the world.

Women today make up a disproportionate percentage of the Rwandan population. In the aftermath of the genocide, they had to head households bereft of fathers. They had to take over farms, and take jobs previously done by men. But there were opportunities, too: Today, 41% of Rwandan businesses are owned by women.

I saw their impact first hand at a coffee project in the city of Nyandungu. All the washing and coffee-bean selection is done by hand, by women there. Women for Women International1, a remarkably active and innovative nongovernmental organization, has already helped over 15,000 Rwandan women through a year-long program of direct aid, job-skills training and education.

The organization is launching a project to train 3,000 women in organic agriculture, and is reaching out to females across the country. The women who instruct their fellow war survivors in economic development are an inspiration to those who cherish the essential benevolence of humanity.

But that is just the beginning. A new constitution ratified in 2003 required that women occupy at least 30% of the seats in parliament. (In our House and Senate only about 17% of the seats are filled by women.) Some wondered at the time whether it was feasible to meet this target. Now, nearly half of parliament and a third of the president’s cabinet posts are held by women. Rwanda today has the world’s highest percentage of female legislators.

Rwanda has a dark past but a bright future. It has a long way to go — the country remains one of the world’s poorest, and the social reverberations of the genocide are evident everywhere. Yet in the midst of tragedy, the women are building something genuinely new. Perhaps it is fitting that a nation so wracked by death could give birth to a vibrant new age. I know that one thing is clear: Through their bold and courageous actions, these women should inspire not only their fellow Africans, but all individuals — men and women — across the globe.

Mrs. McCain, the wife of Sen. John McCain and mother of four, founded the American Voluntary Medical Team, which helps bring doctors to war-torn countries.

Now that’s some solidarity. Something in which we have been sorely lacking in this campaign season, if you ask me. Moreover, Mrs. McCain makes a GREAT point in her piece - the importance of supporting women because they are typically the backbone of the community.

I admit, I had no idea Mrs. McCain was involved in so many humanitarian efforts (and I found out yesterday on the Rachel Ray Show that Mrs. McCain was a Special Ed teacher before she got married to John McCain - who knew??).

Not only does she work with this group, but she works with the Smile Train (their adopted daughter had a cleft palate) and The Halo Trust, an anti-landmine organization. And I have to admit, learning this about her made me see Senator McCain in a new light. Not unlike Elizabeth Edwards did for John Edwards (let’s face it - she was the more compelling person, and is totally awesome in her politics. Without her John was just okay. Which makes his cheating on her all the more offensive, the putz).

figure if he is married to someone like Cindy, he’s a pretty decent fellow (I have said before that I have always thought of him as honorable, and this confirmed it). Cindy McCain seems to have internalized the biblical mandate which basically says, to whom much is given, much is required (Luke 12:48).

You know who else is like this? Hillary and Bill Clinton. Yep - they care a lot about others, and spend millions helping them out. Bill Clinton’s Foundation is an amazing organization, with extremely low Administrative costs - most of the money goes to doing the actual work. And we all remember Hillary’s brilliant speech on Women’s Rights as Human Rights, along with her efforts on behalf of women and other disenfranchised people before and after, that speech.

Frankly, this country is lucky as hell to have these two dedicated public servants, a fact at least John McCain acknowledges, certainly in terms of Hillary Clinton and her work in the US Senate. Know who else thinks so? Senator Joe Biden! Yes, I am sure we have all seen the YouTube video of him claiming Senator Clinton is certainly qualified enough to be President, and as qualified as he, if not more, to be vice president (if you did not see it, here is the LINK).

All that is to say, the hearts of the ones in the White House matter. How they see others, and treat them, matters.

I think there is a world of difference between how the McCains and the Obamas see other people. I cannot imagine for the life of me, Senator McCain flipping off Senator Clinton or Obama. I cannot imagine Cindy McCain saying she is just now proud of her country. What I have seen in both McCains is humility, and the desire to serve.

What I have seen in the Obamas is arrogance, and the desire for power (I might add, this perception is borne out in fact by the Citizens Against Government Waste who said McCain voted 100% FOR the taxpayers in 2007, and Obama voted only 10% of the time for the taxpayers. WOW.). I’ll take a servant’s heart any day (I don’t mean this with a specifically Christian connotation, but in terms of being a true public servant, one who cares about the people whom one serves, who takes THEIR concerns to heart and works to ease their trials and tribulations, who wants to make their lives better, to raise up the disenfranchised, who works for equality for all people, who fights the good fight because it is the right thing to do, not because of the accolades it will bestow. Like that.).

Hillary has it, Bill has it, and so it seems, do John, Cindy, and Sarah Palin, too. I don’t agree with a lot of their politics, but I cannot deny their dedication, commitment, and humility. I think I can live with that for four years. I cannot live with arrogance, condescension, and bullying for four years. Just sayin’.

The “surprise” attack by the Japanese should not have caught the US fleet at Pearl Harbor unawares. There were advanced warnings that people in key positions ignored or shrugged off as unimportant. Well, guess what boys and girls? Similar warnings are now in the hands of the Democratic leadership and they are choosing to ignore the flashing red lights that signal danger ahead.

Just today, courtesy of the Rocky Mountain News, we confirmed that Barack aka Barry Soetoro Obama was a citizen of Kenya since 1963. Barack has yet to stipulate when he renounced or relinquished that citizenship. That will be a distracting issue in the upcoming campaign. Americans don’t want to elect a Kenyan as President. It is that simple.

But then there is the Indonesian problem and his Hawaiian birth certificate.

I confirmed today that several teams/individuals visited Jakarta during the last six months to gather up critical documents regarding Barack. It is amazing what money can buy. The information includes details of how Barack made his way to Pakistan. Oh! Did I mention there have been similar efforts underway in Pakistan. There are several lessons and warnings in the John Edwards affair for Obama. First and foremost, you cannot hide your past.

Did I also mention how small Hawaii is? Republican operatives, with help from their own island backers, have unearthed critical information on Obama and are just biding their time until after the convention to drop it on him. Such as? Having a birth certificate that lists you as Barry Soetoro.

Barack aka Barry Soetoro might have escaped scrutiny back in 1960 when there was no internet. Controlling information back then was so much easier. Not today. It is there for the taking and the Democrats foolishly chose to trust this clown just as they trusted John Edwards.

Who would have thought that John Edwards and his wife would be so arrogant and so disconnected with reality that they would embark on a presidential campaign even though they knew about his affair and the crazy nature of his paramour. Well, that kind of audacity and bamboozlement is not limited to the Edwards family. Meet the Obamas. You don’t know them? Don’t worry, Republican operatives are loaded for bear and you are going to meet a Barack Obama that was hidden and disguised during the Democratic primary. And when the introduction is over the Obama supporters will wish the only thing they had to worry about was a video with Michelle saying disparaging things about caucasians.

Dems. You’ve been warned. Don’t be surprised when the attacks come.

The stunning information recently revealed on Barack Obama forged COLB and potential multiple citizenship suggests that Barack H. Obama is not eligible under Article II of the US Constitution to serve as POTUS.

Because the DNC, and likely our respective state Democratic Committees, have not vetted Obama, it has been up to average American citizens to do so. I’ve put this short guide together based on my experience in my very red state to enable others to do so. This is my story.

For my state, and for others, it looks like the deadline for certifying the eligibility of Presidential candidates “under the constitution” to participate in caucuses, primaries and conventions has passed. Obama had to submit papers by Feb 8th 2008 in my state, as did other candidates. So it is assumed that the candidate the party puts forward is legit.

Now we see what the rush with Obama was. Get every state to certify him before any information came out on the eligibility issue—look at how close we are to the convention and he really has just been busted!

Nevertheless, it looks like challenges to eligibility are still allowed, but it may have to be done by the other party in each state. The time is NOW for everyone to get familiar with their state’s rules, and to call their state’s SOS with a basic outline of information, ask for instructions, and ask if the SOS would be interested in assisting.. Each state’s republican party may or may not be interested.

I initially contacted the state Secretary of State and talked with a staffer about certifying Presidential candidates under the Constitution and how it is done, what role the SOS has, and relevant dates for certification. I mentioned to the staffer that I had information relevant to Obama’s eligibility. I was directed to the state Democratic Party, but when I told the SOS I didn’t think they’d do anything, the SOS indicated they would refer the information to the appropriate individuals.

As predicted, when I contacted the state dem party they told me to go to the DNC or the FEC. Well the DNC won’t do anything, and the FEC really regulates money…so I called the state republican party, who was very interested in the information.

It may be that the best challenge will come from a totally “red” state, where Obama has no chance… a red state SOS challenging Obama’s eligibility under the Constitution—would make news and problems for Obama.

If Obama is found to be ineligible for POTUS under the constitution—the same requirement that each candidate had to participate in caucuses and primaries—then Obama was ineligible to participate in the caucuses & primaries!! The whole primary season would either be thrown out or Clinton would have to be the nominee. In many states, I believe his actions could be considered fraud.

Obama is in Hawaii starting on Friday….of course he will come back with a certified BC that has what he wants on it. Thus it is important NOW to start getting the information out so that the first question he gets when he gets back is, “do you have a new Birth Certificate?”

In summary:

Contact your Secretary of State

Contact Dem/Republican Parties

Write letters to the editor

Keep talking/writing about it NOW!

File information with Secretary of State

Here is a website with info of SOS_50 States:

AttorneysCorpService.com

Sample Script

I am calling to request an investigation as to whether Sen. Obama is eligible to be on the ballot for President, in this state.

There are serious questions that have not been investigated.

For example:

It is possible that he has dual citizenship, which would make him unqualified. He has probably been a citizen of Kenya and Indonesia, and may still be.

And, there is concern that the birth certificate he has published on his website is a forgery, which probably means he is hiding something about his birth.

Ordinary citizens like me cannot take on the burden of investigating presidential candidates.

It’s my understanding that your office has the responsibility, on my behalf and the behalf of all voters, to be sure that presidential candidates are eligible.

What has your office done to be sure that Sen. Obama is eligible?

How can I file a formal request for inquiry, or a challenge to his eligibility?

1. DUAL CITIZENSHIP: Obama likely had, and may still have, INDONESIAN and/or KENYAN CITIZENSHIP, and therefore is ineligible to be POTUS under Art. II of the Constitution (NOTE: this is NOT about where he was born or whether he’s a US citizen. It’s about DUAL CITIZENSHIP, which creates DIVIDED LOYALTIES.)

2. PHONY BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Obama has REFUSED to show a hard copy of his REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE. Evidence suggests that his BC may be in the name of BARRY SOETORO because he was likely adopted by his step-father LOLO SOETORO. Has Obama been LYING ABOUT HIS DUAL CITIZENSHIP, LEGAL NAME, AND IDENTITY?

TD Request for Information: If you have state-specific contact information, please put it in a comment.

Then, our reader writes:

If you notice, at the beginning of the video, Bill makes a comment about Obama being held to a different standard than others who have run for president, but he also said (around the 44 second mark): “That everybody has a right to run for president as long as they’re qualified under the Constitution” (emphasis mine).

Here’s the thing - I have followed Bill’s political career for a long time (and I have studied it closely because I am a political scientist) and he did NOT say this accidentally. This is a message to TexasDarlin’ (I am sure he knows all about her posts and her reports) to keep pressing in on the citizenship/birth certificate issue.

Though I can probably never prove this (and Bill would likely deny it, if he were ever confronted with it), I know that Bill was trying to say - “keep going!”

NOTE: That is NOT what Bill Clinton said. We’re just reading between the lines, perhaps hopefully.

How’s that for insight?

:::::::::::::::::::::::::

NoQuarterUSA Action Of The Day: We ask that you take part in the I Own My Vote Virtual Platform Committee Meeting now! It takes five minutes. Click here to start. If you have not yet signed the pledge, click here to do so.