In his book, “The Audacity of Hope,” presidential candidate Barack Obama writes that the government could kick-start change through a transformation of attitudes in the communities of the urban poor, which is largely made up of African Americans and Latinos. This transformation of attitudes is to begin in homes, communities and places of worship. The Black Church has been fulfilling this role throughout its history, yet it is one that takes on new vistas of responsibility and accountability in the 21st century.
One vital role the Church can play in the black community?s attempt to save its young men and women from a life of poverty, drugs, abuse and prison, is educator of the non-achievers of society. While the Black Church can celebrate the achievements of those who have found their Savior and solace within its walls, it must now go to the highways and the hedges to invite the ?least of these? to come to the banquet that many have been shut out from for far too long. With the achievements and accomplishments of many in the community, the Church can now admit that our circumstances have contributed to the shaping of our culture, and that we can now choose to change our culture by reshaping our circumstances. We are now able to give a new definition to what it means to be both ?black and proud.?
As a pastor, I know that America?s churches are already doing a fine job feeding and clothing the poor. But we can and must do more when confronted with the fact that in some of our cities 65 percent of young black men do not graduate from high school and on a national average; only 2 percent achieve the goal of receiving a university degree.
In the Book of Matthew, Chapter 18, Jesus talks about his disciples? obligation to serve and protect ?the little ones.? In order to accomplish that goal, we must do all we can to serve the most vulnerable people in society ? the children that so often fall through the cracks.
How can we do this?
The Church must act as both school and disciplinarian in a similar fashion to what takes place in the Jewish community. After their public school day ends, Jewish children go to Hebrew school several days a week to supplement their education. Instead of blaming the inadequacies of the public school system, Churches must help young black children develop the ability to read and process information beginning at the earliest ages possible. If we wait too long, the children are likely to find it difficult to resist the insidious pull of the street.
Parents must be brought on board so they understand the importance of sending their children to Church school and support the Church?s efforts to educate and discipline their children so that kids know what it means to be black and educated. Many times parents think they can save their children on their own, particularly after they have lost several children to drugs, crime and early deaths. Many times they try to protect their children from doing the hard work necessary to rise above their life circumstances.
In its school, the Church must provide the support individuals and families need to survive and thrive in spite of the trauma, drama, tragedies, and abuses found in our homes, communities and culture. We must teach all persons to refuse to be overcome by the injustices and inequities of life. We must instill in the young a pride in being human, in playing fair, and in overcoming all obstacles in order to make a contribution to the world. We must acknowledge that doing so is heroic and worthy of sacrifice and we must celebrate the heroism of those who model this behavior.
In the past, individuals who suffered from cultural and community pathologies such as dysfunctional homes, domestic violence, and physical and sexual abuse, were often treated as second class citizens of the Church. Individuals who have suffered and continue to suffer from child abuse and other traumas, especially young men, were left to fend for themselves. This has led to the growth of gangs and other subcultures within our communities, which are now destroying not only the lives of the people involved, but also our communities as well.
Pastors must make it clear that the Church is available to help and heal everyone and that no one will be rejected because of their past indiscretions. Pastors must make it clear that the days of masking these problems are gone forever; these problems must be brought to the light of day and healed.
It is also time that the black community stops reeling from the things other communities have already found the solutions for. It is time that the black community begins implementing new ideas instead of sweeping problems under the proverbial rug. It must start with all of us in all of our Churches across black America.
Dr. Dennis L. Waters is Pastor/President of Spirit of Victory and Praise Community Church in Gaithersburg, Maryland and Pastor/President of Spirit, Victory, Praise Ministries. SVP Ministries helps people move beyond the shame, blame, and pain of past tragedy, trauma, and loss by tapping into the tools and techniques for healing of major Christian religions, including meditation and self-talk affirmations. His latest book is “I Will Restore: A Ministry of Healing to African American Male Survivors of Prepubescent Physical and Sexual Abuse.?
About the Author:
Send an e-mail to spiritvictory@spiritvictorypraise.org or phone 301-607-8277 to request your free copy of “I Will Restore.” Learn more about Dr. D.L. Waters at http://www.spiritvictorypraise.org
In his book, “The Audacity of Hope,” presidential candidate Barack Obama writes that the government could kick-start change through a transformation of attitudes in the communities of the urban poor, which is largely made up of African Americans and Latinos. This transformation of attitudes is to begin in homes, communities and places of worship. The Black Church has been fulfilling this role throughout its history, yet it is one that takes on new vistas of responsibility and accountability in the 21st century.
One vital role the Church can play in the black community?s attempt to save its young men and women from a life of poverty, drugs, abuse and prison, is educator of the non-achievers of society. While the Black Church can celebrate the achievements of those who have found their Savior and solace within its walls, it must now go to the highways and the hedges to invite the ?least of these? to come to the banquet that many have been shut out from for far too long. With the achievements and accomplishments of many in the community, the Church can now admit that our circumstances have contributed to the shaping of our culture, and that we can now choose to change our culture by reshaping our circumstances. We are now able to give a new definition to what it means to be both ?black and proud.?
As a pastor, I know that America?s churches are already doing a fine job feeding and clothing the poor. But we can and must do more when confronted with the fact that in some of our cities 65 percent of young black men do not graduate from high school and on a national average; only 2 percent achieve the goal of receiving a university degree.
In the Book of Matthew, Chapter 18, Jesus talks about his disciples? obligation to serve and protect ?the little ones.? In order to accomplish that goal, we must do all we can to serve the most vulnerable people in society ? the children that so often fall through the cracks.
How can we do this?
The Church must act as both school and disciplinarian in a similar fashion to what takes place in the Jewish community. After their public school day ends, Jewish children go to Hebrew school several days a week to supplement their education. Instead of blaming the inadequacies of the public school system, Churches must help young black children develop the ability to read and process information beginning at the earliest ages possible. If we wait too long, the children are likely to find it difficult to resist the insidious pull of the street.
Parents must be brought on board so they understand the importance of sending their children to Church school and support the Church?s efforts to educate and discipline their children so that kids know what it means to be black and educated. Many times parents think they can save their children on their own, particularly after they have lost several children to drugs, crime and early deaths. Many times they try to protect their children from doing the hard work necessary to rise above their life circumstances.
In its school, the Church must provide the support individuals and families need to survive and thrive in spite of the trauma, drama, tragedies, and abuses found in our homes, communities and culture. We must teach all persons to refuse to be overcome by the injustices and inequities of life. We must instill in the young a pride in being human, in playing fair, and in overcoming all obstacles in order to make a contribution to the world. We must acknowledge that doing so is heroic and worthy of sacrifice and we must celebrate the heroism of those who model this behavior.
In the past, individuals who suffered from cultural and community pathologies such as dysfunctional homes, domestic violence, and physical and sexual abuse, were often treated as second class citizens of the Church. Individuals who have suffered and continue to suffer from child abuse and other traumas, especially young men, were left to fend for themselves. This has led to the growth of gangs and other subcultures within our communities, which are now destroying not only the lives of the people involved, but also our communities as well.
Pastors must make it clear that the Church is available to help and heal everyone and that no one will be rejected because of their past indiscretions. Pastors must make it clear that the days of masking these problems are gone forever; these problems must be brought to the light of day and healed.
It is also time that the black community stops reeling from the things other communities have already found the solutions for. It is time that the black community begins implementing new ideas instead of sweeping problems under the proverbial rug. It must start with all of us in all of our Churches across black America.
Dr. Dennis L. Waters is Pastor/President of Spirit of Victory and Praise Community Church in Gaithersburg, Maryland and Pastor/President of Spirit, Victory, Praise Ministries. SVP Ministries helps people move beyond the shame, blame, and pain of past tragedy, trauma, and loss by tapping into the tools and techniques for healing of major Christian religions, including meditation and self-talk affirmations. His latest book is “I Will Restore: A Ministry of Healing to African American Male Survivors of Prepubescent Physical and Sexual Abuse.?
About the Author:
Send an e-mail to spiritvictory@spiritvictorypraise.org or phone 301-607-8277 to request your free copy of “I Will Restore.” Learn more about Dr. D.L. Waters at http://www.spiritvictorypraise.org
We all carry that stereotype of someone swinging a watch on a chain in front of a person’s eyes when we think about hypnotism. Although there are plenty who still use this method, there are other ways to hypnotize someone. Did you know that by just speaking a few select words that you can hypnotize someone through what is called Conversational Hypnosis? You can and in this article I’ll unveil the cloud of mystery around this technique.
Whether you realize it or not, conversational hypnosis has been around for quite a long time, I guess you could say since the beginning of time really. With this technique you won’t see any snapping fingers or swinging watches. In fact, you won’t see anything at all out of the ordinary. What you may or may not notice, usually the later, are the words being used.
You may be wondering whether you have to be a doctor or a magician to perform this type of hypnosis, in a single word, no. Anyone can learn conversational hypnosis, it just takes practice. This technique uses words through conversation to get passed a person’s critical mind and into the more acceptive parts of the mind. This really isn’t anything new, we all try and get our friends, wives and children to do what we want them to. It’s just that some people are better than others at it, not because they are more gifted but because they know the right words to use.
Now, don’t think that this technique is just used between two people. No sir, it is also used on whole crowds of people, even entire nations. Look at our political leaders running for office. Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama come to mind. They are both very charismatic and no exactly what to say to persuade masses of people to believe and back their ideals. Make no mistake, conversational hypnosis can be a very powerful tool in anyone’s arsenal.
Don’t get any ideas that you can use this technique to have someone do harm to themselves either. No one can be forced subconsciously to do something that will bring harm to them. Conversational hypnosis is such a powerful tool in helping you attain what you desire. Use it wisely and practice as much as you can. To learn more about how you can use this technique just look at my author bio information.
We all carry that stereotype of someone swinging a watch on a chain in front of a person’s eyes when we think about hypnotism. Although there are plenty who still use this method, there are other ways to hypnotize someone. Did you know that by just speaking a few select words that you can hypnotize someone through what is called Conversational Hypnosis? You can and in this article I’ll unveil the cloud of mystery around this technique.
Whether you realize it or not, conversational hypnosis has been around for quite a long time, I guess you could say since the beginning of time really. With this technique you won’t see any snapping fingers or swinging watches. In fact, you won’t see anything at all out of the ordinary. What you may or may not notice, usually the later, are the words being used.
You may be wondering whether you have to be a doctor or a magician to perform this type of hypnosis, in a single word, no. Anyone can learn conversational hypnosis, it just takes practice. This technique uses words through conversation to get passed a person’s critical mind and into the more acceptive parts of the mind. This really isn’t anything new, we all try and get our friends, wives and children to do what we want them to. It’s just that some people are better than others at it, not because they are more gifted but because they know the right words to use.
Now, don’t think that this technique is just used between two people. No sir, it is also used on whole crowds of people, even entire nations. Look at our political leaders running for office. Bill Clinton and Barrack Obama come to mind. They are both very charismatic and no exactly what to say to persuade masses of people to believe and back their ideals. Make no mistake, conversational hypnosis can be a very powerful tool in anyone’s arsenal.
Don’t get any ideas that you can use this technique to have someone do harm to themselves either. No one can be forced subconsciously to do something that will bring harm to them. Conversational hypnosis is such a powerful tool in helping you attain what you desire. Use it wisely and practice as much as you can. To learn more about how you can use this technique just look at my author bio information.
The main dominant figures in today’s elections that will define the following president in America history are Hillary Clinton from New-York and Barack Obama from Illinois .
According to the latest results of votes Clinton won in 3 states: New-Hampshire, Nevada and Michigan , but Obama in Iowa and in the South Carolina . This election campaign looks like more battle than a race between these 2 candidates.
With aggressive attitude to his wife’s rival the former president of the US Bill Clinton aggravates political atmosphere more and more. Behaving this way, he also blackens Hillary’s reputation in the eyes of voters. People become irritated because of his coarse interfering in Hillary’s election campaign.
For example, while talking with Edward Kennedy on the phone, Bill Clinton even raised his voice trying to dictate that Edward should be in neutral attitude to Obama.
As to my own comments, I think thanks to their status each of candidates will remain in the history of America as a special page. Because in case if Hillary is elected she will be the first woman president of America , if Obama, then he will be the first black president. Beginning from November of 2008 new history of America will start.
As for my own opinion about who is most likely to be elected, I think in the course of the votes Barack Obama surpasses Hillary Clinton at two main moments:
The Kennedies, that is one of the most authoritative and respective families in America support him. During his speech in the American University , Edward Kennedy, brother of the late John Kennedy officially declared that he was seconding Obama’s candidature for president post. Caroline Kennedy, J. Kennedy’s daughter also on Obama’s side.
In Sunday issue of the New York Times, she published her article dedicated to Obama with the title “A president like my father”. Edward Kennedy and most of his relatives are members of Democrat party. The Kennedies family is very influential in political arena of America , and their support will certainly increase Obama’s chance in this votes.
In opinion of political scientists, though according to the survey among people he remains behind from Hillary Clinton, the support by Kennedies will increase his popularity among people.
The second moment that can play a role of no small importance is Obama’s viewpoint about Iraq issue. Though Hillary stresses that she was also against starting the Iraq war, Obama’s attitude to this problem is more definite and stable.
He was always disapproving of Bush administration’s decision about starting the Iraq war. He thinks, the problem can be solved only in that case if USA tries to carry on dialogue with Iraq . Therefore, they suppose black Obama who is descended from Moslem family, will easily reconcile America with billions of Moslems.
We are at the door step of a path we have never taken before. As controversial as it may seem we have never had a women or African American President before. Time will tell if we will be witness to this huge event. In any case, everything will come to light in the very near future.
About the Author:
This article was distributed through GuruCreation SEO Service. Online marketing can be a struggle. With the correct guidance and mentoring you can excel.
The main dominant figures in today’s elections that will define the following president in America history are Hillary Clinton from New-York and Barack Obama from Illinois .
According to the latest results of votes Clinton won in 3 states: New-Hampshire, Nevada and Michigan , but Obama in Iowa and in the South Carolina . This election campaign looks like more battle than a race between these 2 candidates.
With aggressive attitude to his wife’s rival the former president of the US Bill Clinton aggravates political atmosphere more and more. Behaving this way, he also blackens Hillary’s reputation in the eyes of voters. People become irritated because of his coarse interfering in Hillary’s election campaign.
For example, while talking with Edward Kennedy on the phone, Bill Clinton even raised his voice trying to dictate that Edward should be in neutral attitude to Obama.
As to my own comments, I think thanks to their status each of candidates will remain in the history of America as a special page. Because in case if Hillary is elected she will be the first woman president of America , if Obama, then he will be the first black president. Beginning from November of 2008 new history of America will start.
As for my own opinion about who is most likely to be elected, I think in the course of the votes Barack Obama surpasses Hillary Clinton at two main moments:
The Kennedies, that is one of the most authoritative and respective families in America support him. During his speech in the American University , Edward Kennedy, brother of the late John Kennedy officially declared that he was seconding Obama’s candidature for president post. Caroline Kennedy, J. Kennedy’s daughter also on Obama’s side.
In Sunday issue of the New York Times, she published her article dedicated to Obama with the title “A president like my father”. Edward Kennedy and most of his relatives are members of Democrat party. The Kennedies family is very influential in political arena of America , and their support will certainly increase Obama’s chance in this votes.
In opinion of political scientists, though according to the survey among people he remains behind from Hillary Clinton, the support by Kennedies will increase his popularity among people.
The second moment that can play a role of no small importance is Obama’s viewpoint about Iraq issue. Though Hillary stresses that she was also against starting the Iraq war, Obama’s attitude to this problem is more definite and stable.
He was always disapproving of Bush administration’s decision about starting the Iraq war. He thinks, the problem can be solved only in that case if USA tries to carry on dialogue with Iraq . Therefore, they suppose black Obama who is descended from Moslem family, will easily reconcile America with billions of Moslems.
We are at the door step of a path we have never taken before. As controversial as it may seem we have never had a women or African American President before. Time will tell if we will be witness to this huge event. In any case, everything will come to light in the very near future.
About the Author:
This article was distributed through GuruCreation SEO Service. Online marketing can be a struggle. With the correct guidance and mentoring you can excel.
This election, First Kid wannabes have been in the public eye like never before. Josh Romney drove through all 99 counties of Iowa in an RV to stump for his Dad, Mitt Romney. His brother Craig used fluent Spanish to voiceover a campaign ad about their “papa.” Cate Edwards hit the trail diligently even though she was a busy second year Harvard Law student. Meghan McCain blogged and vlogged to connect the younger generation to her seventy-something father. And even the famously private Chelsea Clinton took a break from her hedge fund job to stump for Mom.
Americans are fascinated with the offspring of candidates for several reasons. First, nobody knows a person better than his or her kids. We listened when Chelsea got choked up over how proud she is of her Mom, or when Sarah Huckabee remembered the regular Friday morning breakfast dates she enjoyed with her Dad during high school. A heartfelt endorsement from an adult child isn’t something you can buy. It’s something you earn after years of loving service and commitment.
Second, this campaign turned out to be more cyber intense than even the geekiest pundit could have predicted. The twenty-something children of candidates managed to connect and engage a web-savvy generation of voters. We tuned into Romney’s five sons’ updates at fivebrothers, watched videos of Sarah Huckabee bragging about her father at YouTube, tracked Chelsea’s visits to college campuses, and read Meghan McCain’s posts about the campaign whirlwind at mccainblogette – along with her makeup tips.
Third, the choices of adult children reflect on those who raise them, whether we like it or not. When Jenna Bush writes a book about poverty and the AIDS crisis, it takes a bit of pressure off her embattled, challenged-in-the-polls presidential father. And when he walks her down the aisle as the daddy of the bride, hearts are bound to soften even more. The flip side, of course, is that the antics of a child can – and do – hinder a parent’s political career. Pressure like that made Amy Carter withdraw almost completely from the public eye, and it’s no surprise that Chelsea Clinton was a bit wary as she re-entered the limelight.
Finally, we want a President who can laugh. Nothing reveals a candidate’s sense of humor better than the good-natured banter that goes on between the generations. When Cate Edwards, responding to a question about her father’s good looks, joked about how dorky he is, we got that John Edwards didn’t take himself too seriously. Even Emma Claire teased her father at an event by slyly saying she was going to vote for another candidate. And when Matt Romney staged a call to his father from the governor of California, Americans watched the video and laughed along.
Did this yen for connection with a candidate’s children hinder Rudy Giuliani, whose kids played it cool during his campaign? Did it affect those with children too young to stump, like Barack Obama? Judging from the buzz and hype surrounding the more vocal young adult First Kid wannabes, a public cheer, a notable accomplishment, and some friendly teasing from a son or daughter can give any candidate’s campaign a boost.
About the Author:
Mitali Perkins, Mitali Perkins, is the author of two novels for teens about a candidate’s daughter, First Daughter: Extreme American Makeover and First Daughter: White House Rules. Her main character, Sameera Righton, is keeping track of the hype around the REAL First Kid wannabes at First Daughter.
This election, First Kid wannabes have been in the public eye like never before. Josh Romney drove through all 99 counties of Iowa in an RV to stump for his Dad, Mitt Romney. His brother Craig used fluent Spanish to voiceover a campaign ad about their “papa.” Cate Edwards hit the trail diligently even though she was a busy second year Harvard Law student. Meghan McCain blogged and vlogged to connect the younger generation to her seventy-something father. And even the famously private Chelsea Clinton took a break from her hedge fund job to stump for Mom.
Americans are fascinated with the offspring of candidates for several reasons. First, nobody knows a person better than his or her kids. We listened when Chelsea got choked up over how proud she is of her Mom, or when Sarah Huckabee remembered the regular Friday morning breakfast dates she enjoyed with her Dad during high school. A heartfelt endorsement from an adult child isn’t something you can buy. It’s something you earn after years of loving service and commitment.
Second, this campaign turned out to be more cyber intense than even the geekiest pundit could have predicted. The twenty-something children of candidates managed to connect and engage a web-savvy generation of voters. We tuned into Romney’s five sons’ updates at fivebrothers, watched videos of Sarah Huckabee bragging about her father at YouTube, tracked Chelsea’s visits to college campuses, and read Meghan McCain’s posts about the campaign whirlwind at mccainblogette – along with her makeup tips.
Third, the choices of adult children reflect on those who raise them, whether we like it or not. When Jenna Bush writes a book about poverty and the AIDS crisis, it takes a bit of pressure off her embattled, challenged-in-the-polls presidential father. And when he walks her down the aisle as the daddy of the bride, hearts are bound to soften even more. The flip side, of course, is that the antics of a child can – and do – hinder a parent’s political career. Pressure like that made Amy Carter withdraw almost completely from the public eye, and it’s no surprise that Chelsea Clinton was a bit wary as she re-entered the limelight.
Finally, we want a President who can laugh. Nothing reveals a candidate’s sense of humor better than the good-natured banter that goes on between the generations. When Cate Edwards, responding to a question about her father’s good looks, joked about how dorky he is, we got that John Edwards didn’t take himself too seriously. Even Emma Claire teased her father at an event by slyly saying she was going to vote for another candidate. And when Matt Romney staged a call to his father from the governor of California, Americans watched the video and laughed along.
Did this yen for connection with a candidate’s children hinder Rudy Giuliani, whose kids played it cool during his campaign? Did it affect those with children too young to stump, like Barack Obama? Judging from the buzz and hype surrounding the more vocal young adult First Kid wannabes, a public cheer, a notable accomplishment, and some friendly teasing from a son or daughter can give any candidate’s campaign a boost.
About the Author:
Mitali Perkins, Mitali Perkins, is the author of two novels for teens about a candidate’s daughter, First Daughter: Extreme American Makeover and First Daughter: White House Rules. Her main character, Sameera Righton, is keeping track of the hype around the REAL First Kid wannabes at First Daughter.
Oprahbama, the big O’s, Oprah and the Obamas ? sounds like a rock band on a road trip. As Oprah hit the campaign trail recently, her candidate played the celebrity card and the female fan base responded. When you need it, the value of support simply cannot be overestimated.
Oprah is a driving force, with her message of empowering women and her success at moving product. So, for now, the contest for the democratic nomination is more up in the air. Hillary pulled out all the stops, spending her time drumming up support with her mom and daughter close by her side. Are you in the same boat, as Sandwiched Boomers in the midst of dealing with aging parents and growing children? Do you need some help in finding support for yourself? Learn how to go about it from the following ideas:
1. Educate yourself about what to expect and the various organizations or resources available to you. Talk to friends and family whose opinions you respect. Collaboration is essential during such a critical period of time. Reach out and create a network ? you don?t have to do it alone.
2. Be frank with your family. Engage your siblings in the problems and the solutions. Put emotional and logistical support systems in place as you ask for practical help and delegate responsibilities. Have them set aside personal agendas and work together toward collective goals.
3. Find a class or workshop that addresses your specific concerns. Local university extension programs or mental health centers provide training seminars about a variety of concerns and problems that are common to Sandwiched Boomers.
4. Join an ongoing group or attend a weekend retreat to share concerns, problem-solve and gain new perspective. A therapist or a coach can be a sounding board, validate your perceptions, support your ideas and help you follow through with your plans.
5. As knowledge is power, try to better understand the difficult transitions your family in flux is going through. Gather information about how to manage change from the Internet?s search engines or the self-help section of bookstores. Talk to others who have gone through similar experiences in order to get realistic feedback and some concrete advice.
6. Dig deep and find your own inner voice ? listen to what it has to say about caring for your family relationships and nurturing yourself personally. Set some specific goals about what you need from your family and for you. Step by step, work toward achieving them.
Perhaps the marriage of show business and politics is a little too Hollywood for your taste. Obama and Hillary are focused on the best way to achieve maximum political advantage. For you, it’s more about building a support system, not star power. How to get the vote of confidence, from those whose reinforcement you need, may be the crux of your struggle right now. Pitch for the demographic that will buoy you up in times of need. And save the best seats in the house for those who will continue to work on your behalf.
? 2007, Her Mentor Center
About the Author:
Phyllis Goldberg, Ph.D. & Rosemary Lichtman, Ph.D. are co-founders of http://www.HerMentorCenter.com, a website for midlife women and http://www.NourishingRelationships.Blogspot.com, a Blog for the Sandwich Generation. They are authors of a forthcoming book about Baby Boomers’ family relationships and publish a free newsletter, Stepping Stones, through their website. As psychotherapists, they have over 40 years of collective private practice experience.
Oprahbama, the big O’s, Oprah and the Obamas ? sounds like a rock band on a road trip. As Oprah hit the campaign trail recently, her candidate played the celebrity card and the female fan base responded. When you need it, the value of support simply cannot be overestimated.
Oprah is a driving force, with her message of empowering women and her success at moving product. So, for now, the contest for the democratic nomination is more up in the air. Hillary pulled out all the stops, spending her time drumming up support with her mom and daughter close by her side. Are you in the same boat, as Sandwiched Boomers in the midst of dealing with aging parents and growing children? Do you need some help in finding support for yourself? Learn how to go about it from the following ideas:
1. Educate yourself about what to expect and the various organizations or resources available to you. Talk to friends and family whose opinions you respect. Collaboration is essential during such a critical period of time. Reach out and create a network ? you don?t have to do it alone.
2. Be frank with your family. Engage your siblings in the problems and the solutions. Put emotional and logistical support systems in place as you ask for practical help and delegate responsibilities. Have them set aside personal agendas and work together toward collective goals.
3. Find a class or workshop that addresses your specific concerns. Local university extension programs or mental health centers provide training seminars about a variety of concerns and problems that are common to Sandwiched Boomers.
4. Join an ongoing group or attend a weekend retreat to share concerns, problem-solve and gain new perspective. A therapist or a coach can be a sounding board, validate your perceptions, support your ideas and help you follow through with your plans.
5. As knowledge is power, try to better understand the difficult transitions your family in flux is going through. Gather information about how to manage change from the Internet?s search engines or the self-help section of bookstores. Talk to others who have gone through similar experiences in order to get realistic feedback and some concrete advice.
6. Dig deep and find your own inner voice ? listen to what it has to say about caring for your family relationships and nurturing yourself personally. Set some specific goals about what you need from your family and for you. Step by step, work toward achieving them.
Perhaps the marriage of show business and politics is a little too Hollywood for your taste. Obama and Hillary are focused on the best way to achieve maximum political advantage. For you, it’s more about building a support system, not star power. How to get the vote of confidence, from those whose reinforcement you need, may be the crux of your struggle right now. Pitch for the demographic that will buoy you up in times of need. And save the best seats in the house for those who will continue to work on your behalf.
? 2007, Her Mentor Center
About the Author:
Phyllis Goldberg, Ph.D. & Rosemary Lichtman, Ph.D. are co-founders of http://www.HerMentorCenter.com, a website for midlife women and http://www.NourishingRelationships.Blogspot.com, a Blog for the Sandwich Generation. They are authors of a forthcoming book about Baby Boomers’ family relationships and publish a free newsletter, Stepping Stones, through their website. As psychotherapists, they have over 40 years of collective private practice experience.
Almost every day someone calls me and I have to tell them that I can’t help them, that the health care debate issue isn’t resolved and that they will have to choose between losing their health and losing their money.
I have the privilege of being the person who gets to tell hundreds of people each year that they don’t qualify for medical insurance. That the national healthcare debate on kids and adults hasn’t reached a resolution that will help them meet their basic needs for medical care.
I don’t know if the Barak Obama health care plan or if Hilary Clinton’s health care plan is better. I don’t know if president bush’s plan on health care is optimal. I don’t know if when the president vetos a health care bill he is right or wrong. I just know when grown people start crying after they hear how the health care debate has failed them something is horribly wrong with the way we handle this issue in America.
Why we need healthcare reform? reason 1 It fails us when we need it most!
I get calls from people who have worked all of their lives and who were always covered by their job’s medical plan. At some point they developed a disease or had an accident that ended their ability to earn a living. Shortly after this event they lost their job. They were offered COBRA, but COBRA usually last 18 months. After this 18 month period, they are often uninsurable for all but the outrageously expensive guaranteed issue plans offered by the government. These plans often cost several time what a standard plan costs and the standard plans are not cheap.
Why we need healthcare reform? reason 2 The Debate is about who pays for it!
There doesn’t seem to be any thought to ways to reduce the frequency of doctor’s visits. The is nothing done to promote the ideas of eating and living better to reduce the actual costs, just ways to shift the burden of the costs to different people. Frankly, I don’t want the government to tell me that I should stop eating candy nor do I want Big Brother forcing me to do calisthenics every morning. However, I do believe that more should be done to reduce our need for health care and not just change the person or persons who pay for it. I hope that this gets added to the national debate.
Something needs to be done. Universal? Egalitarian? Mandatory? Paid for by consumers? Paid for by taxes? I don’t know. But there should be an answer in a country with the resources that the United States of America has.
Individuals, who have obeyed our laws should be able to find reasonably priced health care regardless of any pre existing condition. The universal healthcare debate which seemed to have peaked in the Hillary Clinton 1993 health care plan, needs to reach a level where we get motivated enough to do something and to fix this pressing problem.
Almost every day someone calls me and I have to tell them that I can’t help them, that the health care debate issue isn’t resolved and that they will have to choose between losing their health and losing their money.
I have the privilege of being the person who gets to tell hundreds of people each year that they don’t qualify for medical insurance. That the national healthcare debate on kids and adults hasn’t reached a resolution that will help them meet their basic needs for medical care.
I don’t know if the Barak Obama health care plan or if Hilary Clinton’s health care plan is better. I don’t know if president bush’s plan on health care is optimal. I don’t know if when the president vetos a health care bill he is right or wrong. I just know when grown people start crying after they hear how the health care debate has failed them something is horribly wrong with the way we handle this issue in America.
Why we need healthcare reform? reason 1 It fails us when we need it most!
I get calls from people who have worked all of their lives and who were always covered by their job’s medical plan. At some point they developed a disease or had an accident that ended their ability to earn a living. Shortly after this event they lost their job. They were offered COBRA, but COBRA usually last 18 months. After this 18 month period, they are often uninsurable for all but the outrageously expensive guaranteed issue plans offered by the government. These plans often cost several time what a standard plan costs and the standard plans are not cheap.
Why we need healthcare reform? reason 2 The Debate is about who pays for it!
There doesn’t seem to be any thought to ways to reduce the frequency of doctor’s visits. The is nothing done to promote the ideas of eating and living better to reduce the actual costs, just ways to shift the burden of the costs to different people. Frankly, I don’t want the government to tell me that I should stop eating candy nor do I want Big Brother forcing me to do calisthenics every morning. However, I do believe that more should be done to reduce our need for health care and not just change the person or persons who pay for it. I hope that this gets added to the national debate.
Something needs to be done. Universal? Egalitarian? Mandatory? Paid for by consumers? Paid for by taxes? I don’t know. But there should be an answer in a country with the resources that the United States of America has.
Individuals, who have obeyed our laws should be able to find reasonably priced health care regardless of any pre existing condition. The universal healthcare debate which seemed to have peaked in the Hillary Clinton 1993 health care plan, needs to reach a level where we get motivated enough to do something and to fix this pressing problem.
My first attempt at fiction, The Sex Ed Chronicles, was based on historical events in my hometown and state, but it was a story of fictional characters. However, there are brilliant works of historical fiction that stay truer to history, when they use well-known historical figures in alternate scenarios.
Eleanor and Ike by Robin Gerber is one such work of fiction.
In Eleanor and Ike, the presidential race features no incumbent president or vice president, only the year is 1952 and the former First Lady at the top of the ticket is Eleanor Roosevelt. It’s interesting, as I read this story, the similarities to the current aspirations of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Like Hillary, Eleanor subordinated personal political ambitions to advance the career of her husband. As First Ladies both traveled around the world representing the United States, were active in the cause of working women and opposition to racial discrimination. Both played important roles in shaping foreign policy. They also had to lead in times of war. Sadly, both had to deal with extramarital affairs before their husbands became President.
Robin Gerber, the author of Eleanor and Ike, is an Eleanor Roosevelt scholar; shes also written a non-fiction work about the late First Lady’s leadership style.
In this work, Eleanor does not promise to continue the economic policies of her late husband’s New Deal in this post-World War II world. She calls her platform America’s Deal based on equality of rights: the right to an education according to ability; the right to earn a living according to ability; the right to equal justice before the law; and the right to participate in government through the ballot, protection of civil liberties, and universal health care.
That’s a platform Hillary Clinton, or any other Democratic candidate, could have run on 56 years later.
America’s Deal would not be the only similarity; we feared nuclear proliferation and the emergence of controversial leadership in Korea then, as now. There were also concerns about homeland security dominating the news in 1952, just as they do today. We also have fears at home; then it was the spread of Communism, today it is terrorism.
Had Eleanor Roosevelt actually run for President, she, like Hillary Clinton, would have led at a time after our institutions, such as Congress and the presidency, had been attacked at gunpoint. President Eleanor Roosevelt would have taken office two years after immigrant gunmen attempted to assassinate President Truman, in the cause of Puerto Rican independence. Puerto Rican Nationalists opened fire on a live session of the House of Representatives 14 months after Eisenhower took office, injuring five members of Congress.
In Gerber’s work, Eleanor’s campaign also thinks about “change,” just as presidential candidates do today. As she is about to kick-off her campaign, a band plays Rocket 88 by Jackie Brenston and Ike Turner, a hymn of praise to the joys of the Oldsmobile “Rocket 88″ automobile; it’s also rumored she will campaign in an Oldsmobile 88 convertible. When Eleanor asks about the choice of song, she’s told: “It represents change. It’s a young people’s song, not a gray-haired grandma kind of song.”
This is where historical fiction breaks away from the realities of today’s Democratic campaign; Hillary Clinton has been unfairly portrayed as old news and politics-as-usual, when the truth is that she has not been a member of the party in power during six of her seven years in the Senate. I don’t see how any Democratic candidate who comes from the Senate could be viewed as a leader for change when they didn’t have the chance to win votes for their legislation.
That goes for Senators Clinton and Obama, since John Edwards has not been an office holder for the past four years. However, it also goes true for the Republicans; as former House Speaker Dennis Hastert once said, they’ve carried the water for their president. There are not many new tunes from the other side, just a rewind of the same Bush songs.
When asked if Eleanor Roosevelt could be elected president today, Gerber said that she’d win in a landslide. She says there is a deep hunger in our country for a leader with conviction, integrity, demonstrated compassion, and authentic humanity.
Those are all traits where Hillary Clinton scores low in opinion polls and Senator Obama appears to score high.
My first attempt at fiction, The Sex Ed Chronicles, was based on historical events in my hometown and state, but it was a story of fictional characters. However, there are brilliant works of historical fiction that stay truer to history, when they use well-known historical figures in alternate scenarios.
Eleanor and Ike by Robin Gerber is one such work of fiction.
In Eleanor and Ike, the presidential race features no incumbent president or vice president, only the year is 1952 and the former First Lady at the top of the ticket is Eleanor Roosevelt. It’s interesting, as I read this story, the similarities to the current aspirations of Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Like Hillary, Eleanor subordinated personal political ambitions to advance the career of her husband. As First Ladies both traveled around the world representing the United States, were active in the cause of working women and opposition to racial discrimination. Both played important roles in shaping foreign policy. They also had to lead in times of war. Sadly, both had to deal with extramarital affairs before their husbands became President.
Robin Gerber, the author of Eleanor and Ike, is an Eleanor Roosevelt scholar; shes also written a non-fiction work about the late First Lady’s leadership style.
In this work, Eleanor does not promise to continue the economic policies of her late husband’s New Deal in this post-World War II world. She calls her platform America’s Deal based on equality of rights: the right to an education according to ability; the right to earn a living according to ability; the right to equal justice before the law; and the right to participate in government through the ballot, protection of civil liberties, and universal health care.
That’s a platform Hillary Clinton, or any other Democratic candidate, could have run on 56 years later.
America’s Deal would not be the only similarity; we feared nuclear proliferation and the emergence of controversial leadership in Korea then, as now. There were also concerns about homeland security dominating the news in 1952, just as they do today. We also have fears at home; then it was the spread of Communism, today it is terrorism.
Had Eleanor Roosevelt actually run for President, she, like Hillary Clinton, would have led at a time after our institutions, such as Congress and the presidency, had been attacked at gunpoint. President Eleanor Roosevelt would have taken office two years after immigrant gunmen attempted to assassinate President Truman, in the cause of Puerto Rican independence. Puerto Rican Nationalists opened fire on a live session of the House of Representatives 14 months after Eisenhower took office, injuring five members of Congress.
In Gerber’s work, Eleanor’s campaign also thinks about “change,” just as presidential candidates do today. As she is about to kick-off her campaign, a band plays Rocket 88 by Jackie Brenston and Ike Turner, a hymn of praise to the joys of the Oldsmobile “Rocket 88″ automobile; it’s also rumored she will campaign in an Oldsmobile 88 convertible. When Eleanor asks about the choice of song, she’s told: “It represents change. It’s a young people’s song, not a gray-haired grandma kind of song.”
This is where historical fiction breaks away from the realities of today’s Democratic campaign; Hillary Clinton has been unfairly portrayed as old news and politics-as-usual, when the truth is that she has not been a member of the party in power during six of her seven years in the Senate. I don’t see how any Democratic candidate who comes from the Senate could be viewed as a leader for change when they didn’t have the chance to win votes for their legislation.
That goes for Senators Clinton and Obama, since John Edwards has not been an office holder for the past four years. However, it also goes true for the Republicans; as former House Speaker Dennis Hastert once said, they’ve carried the water for their president. There are not many new tunes from the other side, just a rewind of the same Bush songs.
When asked if Eleanor Roosevelt could be elected president today, Gerber said that she’d win in a landslide. She says there is a deep hunger in our country for a leader with conviction, integrity, demonstrated compassion, and authentic humanity.
Those are all traits where Hillary Clinton scores low in opinion polls and Senator Obama appears to score high.
Election fever (or malaise) is in the air, and with that comes the usual assortment of moronic emails. The latest grammatical atrocity begins:
?Very interesting and something that should be considered in your choice. If you do not ever forward anything else, please forward this to all your contacts…this is very scarey to think of what lies ahead of us here in our own United States…better heed this and pray about it and share it. We checked this out on “snopes”. It is factual. Check for yourself.?
The message concludes with the usual, ?Please forward to everyone you know. Would you want this man leading our country?…… NOT ME!!!?
Observe the less-traditional ?e-y? spelling of ?scary,? courtesy of the braintrusts behind this dim-witted nonsense.
Any time you receive a message of this type that includes a request to forward it to everybody you know, just reach for your DELete key and dispose of it. Chain email is never a reliable source for news or information. And let?s face it, you?re not the town crier, nor am I. If we forward things like this, we?re part of the problem.
Note that the preface to the message states, ?We checked this out on snopes. It is factual. Check it for yourself.?
Pulleeeze! The knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathers who send this stuff out know that most uninformed recipients will react in knee-jerk fashion and never investigate it themselves. So the senders include a phony-baloney corroboration and unfortunately, that?s good enough for some people. If any recipient did invest 20 seconds to check out ?Who is Barack Obama?? on http://www.snopes.com, they would find that, of course, it?s just a dopey hoax.
It doesn?t matter what the body of this type of message says because there are all kinds of hoaxes, framed in a variety of ways, all designed to trick you into perpetuating the hoax by forwarding it to others.
Look for any of the following five ?red flags? and you?ll be able to identify a hoax just as quickly as it arrives in your inbox.
1. A request to forward it to others. You will never encounter a hoax message that requests that you keep the information to yourself.
2. A message that?s alarmist in tone. Look for lots of exclamation marks or wording that suggests a great sense of urgency.
3. Gratuitous corroboration or authentication in order to make the message sound legitimate. References to having checked it with Snopes, or ?My brother-in-law?s wife?s sister knows somebody who works at Microsoft, and Bill Gates said?? Puleeeze!
4. An assertion that something ?bad? or untoward will happen if you don?t act immediately. That?s right, it?s YOUR fault if something unfortunate happens. (Guilt is always such a lovely touch.)
5. Lots of ?forwarding? marks >>>> indicating that many other individuals have been similarly blessed as recipients. Lucky you.
If you remember nothing else, keep in mind that a hoax will ALWAYS include a request that you forward it to others, so whatever you do, be a good Internet citizen and don?t forward it to anybody
Election fever (or malaise) is in the air, and with that comes the usual assortment of moronic emails. The latest grammatical atrocity begins:
?Very interesting and something that should be considered in your choice. If you do not ever forward anything else, please forward this to all your contacts…this is very scarey to think of what lies ahead of us here in our own United States…better heed this and pray about it and share it. We checked this out on “snopes”. It is factual. Check for yourself.?
The message concludes with the usual, ?Please forward to everyone you know. Would you want this man leading our country?…… NOT ME!!!?
Observe the less-traditional ?e-y? spelling of ?scary,? courtesy of the braintrusts behind this dim-witted nonsense.
Any time you receive a message of this type that includes a request to forward it to everybody you know, just reach for your DELete key and dispose of it. Chain email is never a reliable source for news or information. And let?s face it, you?re not the town crier, nor am I. If we forward things like this, we?re part of the problem.
Note that the preface to the message states, ?We checked this out on snopes. It is factual. Check it for yourself.?
Pulleeeze! The knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathers who send this stuff out know that most uninformed recipients will react in knee-jerk fashion and never investigate it themselves. So the senders include a phony-baloney corroboration and unfortunately, that?s good enough for some people. If any recipient did invest 20 seconds to check out ?Who is Barack Obama?? on http://www.snopes.com, they would find that, of course, it?s just a dopey hoax.
It doesn?t matter what the body of this type of message says because there are all kinds of hoaxes, framed in a variety of ways, all designed to trick you into perpetuating the hoax by forwarding it to others.
Look for any of the following five ?red flags? and you?ll be able to identify a hoax just as quickly as it arrives in your inbox.
1. A request to forward it to others. You will never encounter a hoax message that requests that you keep the information to yourself.
2. A message that?s alarmist in tone. Look for lots of exclamation marks or wording that suggests a great sense of urgency.
3. Gratuitous corroboration or authentication in order to make the message sound legitimate. References to having checked it with Snopes, or ?My brother-in-law?s wife?s sister knows somebody who works at Microsoft, and Bill Gates said?? Puleeeze!
4. An assertion that something ?bad? or untoward will happen if you don?t act immediately. That?s right, it?s YOUR fault if something unfortunate happens. (Guilt is always such a lovely touch.)
5. Lots of ?forwarding? marks >>>> indicating that many other individuals have been similarly blessed as recipients. Lucky you.
If you remember nothing else, keep in mind that a hoax will ALWAYS include a request that you forward it to others, so whatever you do, be a good Internet citizen and don?t forward it to anybody
You would think that two Democrats and one Republican Senator who are running for president would be on different sides of the issue of providing amnesty to illegal aliens. Especially since all votes in the Senate this year on this issue have had most of the Republicans on one side of the issue and most of the Democrats on the other. All three of these candidates voted consistently in support of amnesty to illegal aliens.
It is not the amnesty issue that makes me wonder why these three are not concerned for the security of our country but rather how far they are willing to take the issue. All three voted for YES on the comprehensive immigration reform bill in June 2007. This bill would have provided amnesty to all illegal aliens in the country. They also voted against an amendment to this bill that would have allowed amnesty to most illegal aliens but would have barred those who had committed major crimes while living in our country illegally. I just do not understand how anyone can think that a politician cares about the safety and security of the people they represent when they are willing to bless these criminals, who are here illegally, amnesty and a path to citizenship.
All three voted against the Cornyn Amendment (SA 1184) to S. 1385. S 1385 was an amendment to the comprehensive immigration reform bill that would have given amnesty to illegal aliens. The Cornyn Amendment would have barred illegal aliens who committed the following crimes from receiving amnesty.
1. absconders (i.e., aliens already ordered deported) 2. aliens deemed inadmissible or deportable as security risks (e.g., terrorists) 3. aliens who fail to register as sex offenders 4. aliens convicted of certain firearms offenses 5. aliens convicted of domestic violence, stalking, crimes against children, or violation of protection orders 6. alien gang members 7. aliens convicted of at least three DUIs.
I guess these three believe it is in the best interest of the security of our country and the safety of its citizens to give amnesty to people who come into this county illegally and commit major crimes. None of these candidates are mentioning this issue or their votes on this amendment on the campaign trail so I will proclaim it loud and clear for them so that there is not a mistake of where they stand.
We, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the safety of the citizens of this country to give amnesty to illegal aliens who have been deemed for whatever reason to be security risks to our country.
We, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the saftey of the citizens of this country to give amnesty to illegal aliens who have been convicted of sexual crimes and refuse to register as sex offenders.
We, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the safety of the citizens of this country to give amnesty people who are in this country illegally and who illegally carry weapons with them.
We, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the safety of the citizens of this country to give amnesty to illegal aliens who commit crimes against children and who abuse their families.
We, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the safety of the citizens of this country to give amnesty to illegal aliens who are members of alien gangs. We do not think there is enough of a gang problem here in our country and are committed to seeing that gangs from other countries start up operations here.
And last but not least, we, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the safety of the citizens of this country to give amnesty to illegal aliens who have been arrested three times for driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol.
I have searched for any indication given by any of these candidates as to why they voted this way and I have not been able to find any place where they explained why they voted against the security of our country and the safety of its citizens. I assume that this information is not out there because there simply is not justification for such a vote. They have played their hand and we now see how little they care for America?s safety. I know each of these candidates have good points and stand behind positions that many Americans agree with. But how cans any right-minded citizen who has been informed about their position on this issue, in good conscience vote for them.
You would think that two Democrats and one Republican Senator who are running for president would be on different sides of the issue of providing amnesty to illegal aliens. Especially since all votes in the Senate this year on this issue have had most of the Republicans on one side of the issue and most of the Democrats on the other. All three of these candidates voted consistently in support of amnesty to illegal aliens.
It is not the amnesty issue that makes me wonder why these three are not concerned for the security of our country but rather how far they are willing to take the issue. All three voted for YES on the comprehensive immigration reform bill in June 2007. This bill would have provided amnesty to all illegal aliens in the country. They also voted against an amendment to this bill that would have allowed amnesty to most illegal aliens but would have barred those who had committed major crimes while living in our country illegally. I just do not understand how anyone can think that a politician cares about the safety and security of the people they represent when they are willing to bless these criminals, who are here illegally, amnesty and a path to citizenship.
All three voted against the Cornyn Amendment (SA 1184) to S. 1385. S 1385 was an amendment to the comprehensive immigration reform bill that would have given amnesty to illegal aliens. The Cornyn Amendment would have barred illegal aliens who committed the following crimes from receiving amnesty.
1. absconders (i.e., aliens already ordered deported) 2. aliens deemed inadmissible or deportable as security risks (e.g., terrorists) 3. aliens who fail to register as sex offenders 4. aliens convicted of certain firearms offenses 5. aliens convicted of domestic violence, stalking, crimes against children, or violation of protection orders 6. alien gang members 7. aliens convicted of at least three DUIs.
I guess these three believe it is in the best interest of the security of our country and the safety of its citizens to give amnesty to people who come into this county illegally and commit major crimes. None of these candidates are mentioning this issue or their votes on this amendment on the campaign trail so I will proclaim it loud and clear for them so that there is not a mistake of where they stand.
We, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the safety of the citizens of this country to give amnesty to illegal aliens who have been deemed for whatever reason to be security risks to our country.
We, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the saftey of the citizens of this country to give amnesty to illegal aliens who have been convicted of sexual crimes and refuse to register as sex offenders.
We, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the safety of the citizens of this country to give amnesty people who are in this country illegally and who illegally carry weapons with them.
We, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the safety of the citizens of this country to give amnesty to illegal aliens who commit crimes against children and who abuse their families.
We, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the safety of the citizens of this country to give amnesty to illegal aliens who are members of alien gangs. We do not think there is enough of a gang problem here in our country and are committed to seeing that gangs from other countries start up operations here.
And last but not least, we, being John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama believe it is in the best interest of our national security and the safety of the citizens of this country to give amnesty to illegal aliens who have been arrested three times for driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol.
I have searched for any indication given by any of these candidates as to why they voted this way and I have not been able to find any place where they explained why they voted against the security of our country and the safety of its citizens. I assume that this information is not out there because there simply is not justification for such a vote. They have played their hand and we now see how little they care for America?s safety. I know each of these candidates have good points and stand behind positions that many Americans agree with. But how cans any right-minded citizen who has been informed about their position on this issue, in good conscience vote for them.
Apparently, folks deep inside the CIA, put together a report back in 2003 of the then current assessment of the Iranian nuclear weapons manufacturing crisis. The report stated that the Iranian Government stopped their nuke manufacturing to make weapons in 2003. But this is not news, in fact it was well reported that the IAEA believed that they had.
Actually, they temporarily had problems getting centrifuges to put into their secret underground bases where they were enriching Uranium. Then they tried the old trick that they had already accomplished the tasks and science needed to make the bomb, thus they already had it. Trying a rhetoric ploy, using the history of Israel when they got the technology during the Nixon Administration, once Israel had it, there was nothing anyone could do.
After this did not work with Iran, probably because they had threaten to blow Israel off the map and probably because they support International Terrorist Organizations, like Hezbollah, which hijacked Lebanon and started a mini-little war with Israel. Now the Democrats are blasting this so-called news all over all the media sources to boost their support in the Presidential Primary.
All the Democrat Presidential Race Candidates have statements coming out about this news and are putting media pressure and blind public faith in that media to good use as they back track on the Iran threat. Indeed, standing the most to gain is Barrack Obama, who is looking to pull ahead of Hilary Clinton in the polls. If you will recall Candidate Obama, stated he would rush right over in the first week in office to meet with such leaders as Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong Il and the President of Iran, whose name no one can spell.
If Iran has stopped its nuclear weapons program then we have only one person to thank, it is not the Democrats, it is President George W. Bush, for standing tall and not flinching. If Iran has not stopped its nuclear weapons making then we need to stop it, with Operation Eradicate in 2008. No nuclear weapons in the hands of International Terrorists, not now, not ever! Think on it.
My name is Lance Winslow and I am a semi-retired entrepreneur, retired Franchisor and now I am a consultant brain-4-hire, internet writer and author. I got bored in retirement so I founded the Online Think Tank – http://www.worldthinktank.net . If you would like to send me an email just to say hi, discuss an article, send me hate mail or need some advice you can find me at; http://www.carwashguys.com/history/founder.html . Have a great day and thanks for reading – tell me about you?
–
Apparently, folks deep inside the CIA, put together a report back in 2003 of the then current assessment of the Iranian nuclear weapons manufacturing crisis. The report stated that the Iranian Government stopped their nuke manufacturing to make weapons in 2003. But this is not news, in fact it was well reported that the IAEA believed that they had.
Actually, they temporarily had problems getting centrifuges to put into their secret underground bases where they were enriching Uranium. Then they tried the old trick that they had already accomplished the tasks and science needed to make the bomb, thus they already had it. Trying a rhetoric ploy, using the history of Israel when they got the technology during the Nixon Administration, once Israel had it, there was nothing anyone could do.
After this did not work with Iran, probably because they had threaten to blow Israel off the map and probably because they support International Terrorist Organizations, like Hezbollah, which hijacked Lebanon and started a mini-little war with Israel. Now the Democrats are blasting this so-called news all over all the media sources to boost their support in the Presidential Primary.
All the Democrat Presidential Race Candidates have statements coming out about this news and are putting media pressure and blind public faith in that media to good use as they back track on the Iran threat. Indeed, standing the most to gain is Barrack Obama, who is looking to pull ahead of Hilary Clinton in the polls. If you will recall Candidate Obama, stated he would rush right over in the first week in office to meet with such leaders as Castro, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong Il and the President of Iran, whose name no one can spell.
If Iran has stopped its nuclear weapons program then we have only one person to thank, it is not the Democrats, it is President George W. Bush, for standing tall and not flinching. If Iran has not stopped its nuclear weapons making then we need to stop it, with Operation Eradicate in 2008. No nuclear weapons in the hands of International Terrorists, not now, not ever! Think on it.
My name is Lance Winslow and I am a semi-retired entrepreneur, retired Franchisor and now I am a consultant brain-4-hire, internet writer and author. I got bored in retirement so I founded the Online Think Tank – http://www.worldthinktank.net . If you would like to send me an email just to say hi, discuss an article, send me hate mail or need some advice you can find me at; http://www.carwashguys.com/history/founder.html . Have a great day and thanks for reading – tell me about you?
[