Michael Bresciani
Obama rebukes GOP for snubbing gay serviceman? - High level hypocrisy
By Michael Bresciani
In homiletical discourse less is often more. This is precisely why any preacher who is not a novice will use the standard introduction, three points and a conclusion to keep listeners from falling off into inattention. In the case of Obama's indignant public reproof of the republicans at the recent GOP debate in Orlando on September 22, 2011, three points and one sad conclusion are all that's needed.
Mr. Obama said "We don't believe in the kind of smallness that says it's OK for a stage full of political leaders — one of whom could end up being the President of the United States — being silent when an American soldier is booed." The rebuke was leveled at a Human Rights Campaign annual dinner in Washington which was attended by gays, lesbians and their supporters.
A far more angry and animated rebuke was leveled at the GOP which brought applause and cheers from his supporters when Mr. Obama said, "We don't believe in the kind of smallness that says it's OK for a stage full of political leaders — one of whom could end up being the President of the United States — being silent when an American soldier is booed."
Firstly, although there is more than one U.S. Serviceman who has questioned the Presidents eligibility to serve as Commander in Chief, the one most well known is Lt. Col Terry Lakin. Lakin not only wore the uniform Mr. Obama reminds us should be honored but he had a lifetime of distinguished service in the medical corps that would be the envy of any serviceman in the nation.
Secondly, there was not so much as a peep from the executive branch when it was learned that Col. Lakin was denied his right to discovery (access to Obama birth records) by Judge Denise Lind who apparently thought it may prove too embarrassing to the President.
Col. Lind effectively shot down Col. Lakin's entire defense before he ever went to the court marshal which virtually assured his conviction. Mr. Obama's sense of fair play for U.S. servicemen was conspicuously missing at that juncture. The Commander in Chief is a misnomer, and the very title is a farce if he is not willing to see, that regardless of charges every uniformed soldier deserves equal justice under the law.
Col. Lakin got no justice but only a speedy one way trip on the Obama I don't care railroad to Leavenworth penitentiary. This was not a case of one gay soldier drawing a blank or some disdain at a GOP debate but it is the smashing of a dedicated soldiers life, career and future, all without so much as a peep from the only one who could have reset the proceedings to reflect his concern for his own decorated officer.
It is clear that Mr. Obama's concern for the snubbed soldier at the GOP debate is entrenched in his own political agenda. You need not have a political science degree or advanced studies in philosophy to see that by any other name this is just blatant hypocrisy.
Point three is perhaps the most important of them all. Rather than step up to the plate for his own officer with his questioned birth certificate Mr. Obama waited until pressure from businessman Donald Trump had mounted before pulling out the much disputed document. It is clear that getting re-elected took precedence over acting as a Commander in Chief; this too is high level hypocrisy.
In conclusion, it has never been proven that the gay serviceman was actually booed at the debate. Additionally if he was ignored it could be that even that could be called discretion for a group of Americans who for the most part because they are on the right, continue to hold to the scriptural belief that homosexuality is a sin of perversion and the promulgation or promoting of it can make them guilty, culpable or complicit by association. It is a matter of conscience and religious conviction that even a President has no right to interfere with even in this day of sinking morals.
The Bible that so many of them still resort to for guidance (Romans 1: 1f) does not allow them to hate, hurt or disdain the gays but it still does not allow them to see the gay life as normal and a boost for America's future. They were being true to their convictions, discrete and by no means should they have earned a rebuke from the President. Lest we forget re-election is on the front burner. With the dismal record Mr. Obama has behind him, it would seem that any cause will do to reanimate a sagging and dismal history for the Obama administration.
As a footnote we must not fail to mention that the birth certificate that was finally released is being heralded as a very poor fraud according to several expert graphic forensic analysts. Now we have the question of the spurious social security number atop the list of missing documents and un-answered questions about Mr. Obama's past, but don't worry he won't let one soldier be slighted by the GOP without his notice.
I can't think of a stronger word than 'hypocrisy' to use in my conclusion but it is not used merely to criticize the President. It is after all, a matter of his record that calls for the use of the word.
© Michael Bresciani
October 4, 2011
In homiletical discourse less is often more. This is precisely why any preacher who is not a novice will use the standard introduction, three points and a conclusion to keep listeners from falling off into inattention. In the case of Obama's indignant public reproof of the republicans at the recent GOP debate in Orlando on September 22, 2011, three points and one sad conclusion are all that's needed.
Mr. Obama said "We don't believe in the kind of smallness that says it's OK for a stage full of political leaders — one of whom could end up being the President of the United States — being silent when an American soldier is booed." The rebuke was leveled at a Human Rights Campaign annual dinner in Washington which was attended by gays, lesbians and their supporters.
A far more angry and animated rebuke was leveled at the GOP which brought applause and cheers from his supporters when Mr. Obama said, "We don't believe in the kind of smallness that says it's OK for a stage full of political leaders — one of whom could end up being the President of the United States — being silent when an American soldier is booed."
Firstly, although there is more than one U.S. Serviceman who has questioned the Presidents eligibility to serve as Commander in Chief, the one most well known is Lt. Col Terry Lakin. Lakin not only wore the uniform Mr. Obama reminds us should be honored but he had a lifetime of distinguished service in the medical corps that would be the envy of any serviceman in the nation.
Secondly, there was not so much as a peep from the executive branch when it was learned that Col. Lakin was denied his right to discovery (access to Obama birth records) by Judge Denise Lind who apparently thought it may prove too embarrassing to the President.
Col. Lind effectively shot down Col. Lakin's entire defense before he ever went to the court marshal which virtually assured his conviction. Mr. Obama's sense of fair play for U.S. servicemen was conspicuously missing at that juncture. The Commander in Chief is a misnomer, and the very title is a farce if he is not willing to see, that regardless of charges every uniformed soldier deserves equal justice under the law.
Col. Lakin got no justice but only a speedy one way trip on the Obama I don't care railroad to Leavenworth penitentiary. This was not a case of one gay soldier drawing a blank or some disdain at a GOP debate but it is the smashing of a dedicated soldiers life, career and future, all without so much as a peep from the only one who could have reset the proceedings to reflect his concern for his own decorated officer.
It is clear that Mr. Obama's concern for the snubbed soldier at the GOP debate is entrenched in his own political agenda. You need not have a political science degree or advanced studies in philosophy to see that by any other name this is just blatant hypocrisy.
Point three is perhaps the most important of them all. Rather than step up to the plate for his own officer with his questioned birth certificate Mr. Obama waited until pressure from businessman Donald Trump had mounted before pulling out the much disputed document. It is clear that getting re-elected took precedence over acting as a Commander in Chief; this too is high level hypocrisy.
In conclusion, it has never been proven that the gay serviceman was actually booed at the debate. Additionally if he was ignored it could be that even that could be called discretion for a group of Americans who for the most part because they are on the right, continue to hold to the scriptural belief that homosexuality is a sin of perversion and the promulgation or promoting of it can make them guilty, culpable or complicit by association. It is a matter of conscience and religious conviction that even a President has no right to interfere with even in this day of sinking morals.
The Bible that so many of them still resort to for guidance (Romans 1: 1f) does not allow them to hate, hurt or disdain the gays but it still does not allow them to see the gay life as normal and a boost for America's future. They were being true to their convictions, discrete and by no means should they have earned a rebuke from the President. Lest we forget re-election is on the front burner. With the dismal record Mr. Obama has behind him, it would seem that any cause will do to reanimate a sagging and dismal history for the Obama administration.
As a footnote we must not fail to mention that the birth certificate that was finally released is being heralded as a very poor fraud according to several expert graphic forensic analysts. Now we have the question of the spurious social security number atop the list of missing documents and un-answered questions about Mr. Obama's past, but don't worry he won't let one soldier be slighted by the GOP without his notice.
I can't think of a stronger word than 'hypocrisy' to use in my conclusion but it is not used merely to criticize the President. It is after all, a matter of his record that calls for the use of the word.
© Michael Bresciani
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
