Citizen Obama: A Disappointment to the People
Gerald Lower
So much of U.S. foreign policy is based on glaring assumptions, which
never provide a particularly solid base upon which to define policy and
take action. Dick Cheney and George W. Bush, for example, assumed that the rest of the world would applaud them as global heroes for eliminating
Saddam Hussein and "liberating" Iraq. Bad assumption. Currently, these
two losers are assuming that the American People and the rest of the world will never hold them accountable for their criminal actions in Iraq and their nourishment of a global economic meltdown. Bad assumption.
Likewise, Barack Obama assumed that he could implement meaningful change in the U.S. socioeconomic system by accommodating those who brought about the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and nourished the global economic meltdown, as opposed to making them accountable. Bad assumption.
Having largely failed to make meaningful change in Wall Street, not to
mention health care reform, Obama now assumes that newly emergent economic powers, e.g., Russia and China, and other members of the G20 will happily accept the current U.S. global hegemony. Bad assumption, especially after having demonstrated to the world that we are one cheerfully greedy and corrupt nation, unwilling and unable to bring fiscal criminals to justice, unwilling and unable to change.
For that matter, the U.S. in general, operates on the assumption that the American people and those in other nations are a tad too stupid to ever see through the corrupt greed-driven game of capitalism in the U.S. Bad assumption, reflecting a bad attitude that is a put-down to all thoughtful people.
The British, for example, can claim Watson and Crick, the discoverers of
the structure of DNA. The French can claim Jacob and Monod the
discoverers of genetic regulation. The Germans can claim Albert Einstein
and Relativity Theory. The people in the rest of the world do see what is
going on in the U.S. and in the larger world, you may count on it. The
U.S. can only claim that corporate America took control of our academic
science over three decades ago.
Indeed, the UK Guardian recently ran an editorial entitled "Obama the
Impotent" (1). We all heard Obama's campaign rhetoric and we liked it,
because Obama spoke to human rights and the true values of American
Democracy.
Obama seemed to be reasonably well-versed in the democracy that Jefferson and Franklin had in mind. So, we voted for him and we expelled the political right wing (represented by the mindless, idealess Republican
Party) out of Congress and out of the White House. God bless the People for that accomplishment. Obama owes the People, does he not?
Unfortunately, at the moment, neither political party is paying any
particular attention to the "will of the People" (2). Obama is seemingly
most intent on accommodating Roman religion and salvaging conservative
right wing capitalism. We, the People, are apparently supposed to
maintain our support for Obama based on faith alone. It has gotten so bad that several editorials have referred to Obama as "Barack Bush" (2, 3).
Just what is the problem here? Is it the 2.8 $Million that Obama made
last year on his book sales? Does Obama really believe that anyone on
this Earth is worth that kind of recompense? Certainly there is not
enough money on the planet for all of us to be so handsomely rewarded,
which means that Obama's income is ipso facto unfair.
One gets the impression that Obama now speaks on behalf of the rich and powerful - after having become one of them himself. This may not be true. Obama might only be speaking on behalf of Barack Obama. So much of his behavior has been "out of character".
At the same time, one can recognize that it character is disallowed in the
right wing U.S. One cannot be one person - one must be and do "whatever it takes" to survive.
Obama must recall that he was elected by the People, people who typically have little or no respect or admiration for anyone or anything on Wall Street, the advocates of which they see as common criminals running a cheap gambling operation. Yes, we run the United States of America, the world's first Democracy, as if it were a native American casino (4).
If Obama knows anything about Thomas Jefferson he would know that American Democracy has its own answers to Why questions, i.e., its own human rights-based theology, quite unrelated to Roman religion with its
supernatural theology.
On the off chance that Obama needs some advice here, I would suggest that he read "Jefferson's Bible" (5), a copy of which he received gratis when he moved into his Senate office.
To make matters worse, right wing Republicans are now busily rewriting
American history to the point that they make Thomas Jefferson into a holy roller who would "make the right wing look moderate" (6). This is
certainly one of the largest loads of utter bullshit to have been dumped
on the American people, thanks to the desperate and extremist right wing mouthpieces now defining the Republican Party.
It is true that Jefferson was a "Jesus freak", but his Jesus had nothing
to do with Roman religion. Jefferson's Bible ends with Matthew 20: "They
rolled a large stone in front of the sepulcher and departed." That is it,
no resurrection, no ascension. Jesus was entirely human, now dead and
gone, able to live on this Earth only in the People.
We are, as a result of Obama's accommodation of right wing views and
policies (at the expense of nascent Christian views and policies), now
seen as a "fraud" in the eyes of the world (3). At home, Obama seems to believe that Wall Street is some sort of honest gauge of the fiscal health of the U.S. and the world economy. That simply cannot be true, given the nature of the Wall Street Bull - all balls, no brains.
The American people tend to know that the fiscal health of our nation is
more dependent upon a viable and healthy labor force. What a monumental shame on ourselves. Nothing on Wall Street has anything to do with human rights and democracy. Obama certainly must know that. The political right wing has millions of people voting against their own best interests.
Had Obama read Jefferson's Bible, he might know that Jefferson saw Jesus as being entirely human, a man who actually knew how the human world could work better. The Roman Church, had taken the humanness away from Jesus, to succeed only in taking Jesus away from those humans hoping to be a People. It is truly as simple as that.
Clearly, there is nothing wrong with Jesus and his nascent value system,
born of human reason (as are the values of natural science and natural
philosophy), centered around the Golden Rule and the concept of thinking
for oneself. Our dilemma has more to do with the fact that Jesus was
largely defined by the Roman church under Constantine, whose interest was mostly in conquest and control of the known world. After all, he was a Roman emperor and Rome perceived itself as having a job to do.
Rome defined Jesus as a supernatural spook, a crock of Roman bull, belief
in whom (i.e., meaning total belief in the Roman world view) would
guarantee a trip to Heaven. My, what an insidiously dishonest way to beg the loyalty of the People to absolutely nothing more than Roman religion. No institution on this Earth has known less about Jesus and denigrated Jesus more than the Roman Catholic church.
Indeed, that is precisely why Jefferson demanded the separation of church and state. He wanted America to be a nascent Christian nation dedicated to human rights and democracy, not a Roman religious state dedicated to despotism, conquest and control. There is no precedent for human rights-based nascent Christianity to survive under Roman dominion. Rome has yet to get the true Christian message.
Certainly, Obama must know that Roman right wing ideology is on its
deathbed. The Earth can no longer tolerate the blind machinations of
unbridled Romanism. We stand at the "End of Times" for western religion
and greed-driven capitalism.
The entire current scenario, which Obama is hoping to change, will very
soon be in our history books. How does Obama want to come off as a
citizen? As a Thomas Jefferson or a Franklin Delano Roosevelt, or as an
ignorant lackey for corrupt capitalism? The decision is his (and ours)
alone, my friends.
What we need the most in this world is a re-discussion of what we mean by the terms "human rights" and "democracy". We need to re-discuss the theology of Jeffersonian Democracy, do we not? We need to re-discuss how we got here and why we are here. We need to do a bit of thinking on spiritual ground.
Those of us with a mind of our own would love to hear what Obama has to say on the theology of Democracy, given a Republican Party with nothing intelligent to say. Obama is in a position where he can nourish the return of Jesus and human rights to this sorry Roman world, a return to nascent Christian values being the only viable option left for us as a
People.
Jefferson knew that Jesus was not a man asking to be worshipped or to whom one prayed, but rather Jesus was a man to be emulated in thought and action. Indeed, Jefferson's genius was embedded in his recognition of Jesus as the Father of Human Rights (7).
It really is as simple as that, never mind two millennia of Rome's
mindless confusion. It is all part and parcel of the larger evolutionary
program in which all people are now embedded. Jefferson knew full well
that the "Ball of Liberty" would "roll round the world". He was America's
first reason-based prophet.
Everything in the Universe hangs on how we raise our young people, to be "consumers" of the earth or to be in comprehension of our origins from and purposes on this planet, and our utter dependence upon a viable Earth, not an Earth that is dying as a result of our over-consumption of Earthly resources.
We need some intelligent, reason-based leadership, certainly not to be
found in Roman religion, which is likely the largest crock of cultural
bull ever unleashed upon the People, this time by the Republican Party.
It allows Michael Moore to see capitalism as both comedy and tragedy (8).
There is nothing that transcends human reason and human knowledge on this Earth. Conceptual evolution in natural science has taken us from the Age of WHAT Questions (Socrates, Inductive Thought, Descriptive Knowledge) to the Age of HOW Questions (Newton, Deductive Thought, Mechanistic Knowledge) to the Age of WHY Questions (Einstein, Reductive Thought, Systematic Knowledge).
The resulting cultural evolution involving the post-Newton Industrial
Revolution and the post-Einstein Informational Revolution has taken us
from the tribal to the national to the global levels of human
organization.
The difference between reason and religion can be seen as the difference
between American enlightenment and Roman darkness. We need a President
who is a Jeffersonian Christian, not a Roman "christian" - because there
is no Christianity in Roman religion and there never has been. Every
notion of unfairness and inequality is embedded in Roman religious
mythology.
It is time to grow up, People. It is not that difficult. Our Fathers
pulled it off two centuries ago, even before people like Pasteur who
taught us of the earthly causes of disease and Darwin who taught us of our
common earthly origins.
It is almost as if Obama is being directed by some "invisible" agents of
an "invisible" government. Its only accomplishment thus far is "the Rise
of Barack Obama and the silencing of the left"(9). Obama even buys into
right wing American "exceptionalism" (10) and the notion that Americans
are somehow "chosen" and have a divine right to global dominion, this
being nothing but a load of right wing religious rot reeking of
self-righteousness.
Even so, if we, the People of the United States, want to bring anything
resembling America back into our reality, Barack Obama remains the first,
the best and the only hope that we have at the moment (11). As the
religious right wing continues to commit self-inflicted political suicide,
we can only hope that Obama will grow up before we do, so as to provide us
some real leadership.
READINGS
Steven Hill, Guardian UK, September 22, 2009
Victor Davis Hanson, National Review, July 10, 2008
3) Meet Barack W. Bush: The President is systematically embracing his
predecessor's terror policies
Charles Krauthammer, NY Daily News, May 21, 2009
4) Casino Capitalism: Fortune Editor Says Administration Gaming System
for Wall Street Titans
5) Jefferson's Bible - The Life and Morals of Jesus Christ of Nazareth
Thomas Jefferson, David McKay & Co., NY, 1976.
6) Barton Says Thomas Jefferson Would Make the Religious Right Look Moderate
Kyle, Right Wing Watch, August 3, 2009
7) Jesus, Jefferson and Human Rights
Dr. Gerry Lower, Salvation Network, March 3, 2007
8) Capitalism as Comedy and Tragedy
Michael Moore, Common Dreams, September 28, 2009
9) Obama & Empire: Power, Illusion & America's Last Taboo
John Pilger, Z Communications, September 2, 2009
10) Obama Too Is An American Exceptionalist
Michael Scherer, Time, April 4, 2009
Eyal Press, The Nation, September 25, 2009
Author's Bio: PdD - McArdle Laboratories for Cancer Research Gerry Lower, Ph.D. Profile
University of Wisconsin Medical School
Mentor - Prof. Van R.Potter, the Father of "Bioethics" and "Global Bioethics"
Interests: Conceptual Evolution of Natural Science
Conceptual Evolution of Natural Philosophy and the resulting Cultural in the World. All of Life is Evolutionary.
----------------------
Commentary: Reflections on G. M. Lower and colleagues’ 1979 study
associating slow acetylator phenotype with urinary bladder cancer: meta-analysis, historical refinements of the hypothesis, and lessons learned
Nathaniel Rothman1, Montserrat Garcia-Closas and David W Hein Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, NCI, NIH, DHHS, Bethesda, MD20892
"In 1979, Gerald Lower and colleagues published the first epidemiologic study to directly test the hypothesis that individuals exposed to aromatic amines would be at higher risk of urinary bladder cancer if they had the slow acetylator phenotype.1 Not only was the paper a landmark in the history of bladder cancer carcinogenesis (1), it was one of the very first efforts to study the effect of a metabolic polymorphism on relative susceptibility (as opposed to relative risk) for any cancer", one of the first papers in the area of "Molecular Epidemiology", for which Lower provided the conceptual foundations (2). Lower has also provided the conceptual foundations of the Mutagen/Mutation Theory of Neoplastic Disease (3).
"Lower's work has inspired an entire generation of scientists worldwide who have studied carcinogenesis, and have sought out a framework to effectively and thoughtfully integrate the old and new tools of molecular biology into the broader world of studying and trying to prevent disease."
1) N-acetyltransferase phenotype and risk in urinary bladder cancer: approaches in molecular epidemiology. Preliminary results in Sweden and Denmark
Lower GM Jr, Nilsson T, Nelson CE, Wolf H, Gamsky TE, Bryan GT. Environ Health Perspect. 1979;29:71-9.
2) The Molecular Epidemiology of Arylamine-Induced Urinary Bladder Cancer: Conceptual foundations Gerald M.Lower, Jr., Federation Proceedings 42: 129-135,1983.
3) The Mutation Theory of Chronic, Noninfectious Disease: Relevance to Epidemiologic Theory Gerald M. Lower, Jr and Marty S.Kanarek, Am J Epidemiology, 115: No. 6, June, 1982
www.opednews.com/articles/Citizen-Obama-A-Disappoin-by-Gerald-Lower-091001-792.html