Obama's seal and motto were highly lame, at best, that's true. I'm glad they were dropped. This is not the first time variants of the seal have been made or utilized, however. John McCain's own caucus uses three different versions of the seal for fundraising purposes. And the description of one of the task forces using such a seal isn't helpful to conservatives who want to run with this one, either:

"Since it was founded by President Ronald Reagan in 1981..."

Well!

Yea, but Reagan was a man, who deserved a seal, -------------------- who deserves to be up on Rushmore.

Other than the quaint descriptive "community activist," and pal of NAZI collaborators, anti-American terrorists and whacked out black supremacists, ---------------------- what actually has the false messiah done to warrant consideration for the presidency, let alone warrant his own seal.

You see it always comes down to deeds, real, not feigned.

Of course the messiah figure needed his own group of "Apostles," {Soros, Pflegger, Ayers, Dohrn, Farrakhan, et al...}, his own John the Baptist, who anointed him and threw brickbats at the establishment, {Wright}, his own wrongly attacked Magdalene, that he stepped forward to defend, {his wife}, his own Evangelists, {the media} and since this drama isn't quite done, there are several acts still outstanding.

But if he loses, if McCain should prevail in early November, I'm sure that will be characterized as a "crucifixion" moment.

The Left styles itself the be all and end all of political sophistication, they're the smart ones, they're the ones with the post-graduate degrees, they're the ones that are "smart enough" to get tenure at America's universities, yet there they are, out there throwing themselves like miserable serfs at the feet of this figment of their own imagination. A guy who has done nothing, but intone the words that others have crafted for him.

So far the one indisputable talent he has demonstrated is a certain skill at tossing relations and past associations under a bus. Now THAT he can do, he's a regular sensei at that, ---------------------------------- but advancing legislation, enacting policy, even showing up to vote on contentious issues of the day, --------------------------- that's, shall we say, problematic for the false messiah.

Whatever.

Truth is indeed stranger than fiction, 'cause you couldn't make this stuff up, that here we are, in the 21st century, and there are ostensibly educated Americans out prostrating themselves before a man who makes Hillary appear seasoned in comparison.

E Pluribus Unum=the creation of the way of the world, the generation of authority from the the interplay of subjectivity, with emphasis on authority/establishment. Vero Possumus=essentially the same thing, depending on who the "we" is that can, the emphasis is on the subjectivity. Or at least it is easy enough to fit everything into Hegel. It all depends upon what manifold means, and how exactly we come to understand each other. To be more bold we could simply replace the Latin with plain english: Yes we can!

Because, certainly it isn't every american comming together to decide that Latin should rule. No one is asking the candidates to speak the plain Veritas.

But knowing more about Obama, about the wife, about their years, years and more years, with Wright, with Pflegger, with other whacko types, ----------------------- who exactly is the "we" that Obama is referring to, when he proclaims "Yes, we can."

Somehow I don't think it's those Americans that we know. And it's certainly not those Americans that prevailed over the Fascist powers, that held the line against the Communists, then won a long twilight struggle, culminating in the ignominious collapse of the Iron Curtain. His Americans aren't those that rebounded from the economic disaster of the '70s, or those that formed the greatest economy on the planet, or crafted a country second to none.

Obama is the candidate of all those Americans with hangups, issues, in, or in need of therapy, those with complexes, ---------- those that see the world through the weird and warped prism of race/class/gender. A dark triad that.

Listen to his speeches! You'll notice certain themes, which he constantly refers to; you'll hear mentions of slavery, {par for the course with him, even though he's supposedly the guy "transcending" race} the civil rights struggles, the battle for the franchise, Japanese internment, the underground railroad, Jim Crow South, ------------------------ but notice what you DON'T hear from him, ----------------------- the land of opportunity, a refuge in a storm of unfreedom that has occasionally swept the world, he doesn't mention the Bulge, Iwo, Guadalcanal, {"that fucking island," as our Marines referred to it}. When does he mention the Apollo program? Bush said we're going to Mars, ------- don't hear much about that from Obama, and that's because the money spent on that wouldn't be available for his worthless social programs. When has Obama mentioned Hubble, {which is perhaps one of greatest achievements of our country, and that's saying something, we delivered a telescope high up into the heavens, which we then discovered didn't work, so what did we do then, -------- throw up our hands? No, we then proceeded to fix those problems, which were well nigh impossible to fix in space, but we did it, and Hubble went on to transform human understanding of the cosmos, providing breathtaking pictures of God's creation}.

What else doesn't he mention? Manifest Destiny, close cousin to American Exceptionalism. Don't hear him mention either "the especial relationship," which has been the bedrock upon which the hopes of man has rested, again, in a world more often unfree than free. You don't even hear him mention "the free world," which is a phrase foreign to his multicultural crowd.

When has he mentioned the conquest of the West, except to rip and to tear into our rapacious forefathers, when has he mentioned the West but to extol stone age peoples, at the expense of our forefathers. Does he note the courage of those who blazed a trail that others followed? No, when he extols courage, it's reserved for Rosa Parks, and Rosa Park types, like those featured in the film "Mississippi Burning."

What does this man know, REALLY KNOW of America, especially in light that he spent the first part of his life abroad, {18 years abroad} away from the normal ebbs and flows of this country. He never mentions the story that is America, only those tales conducive to the takes of Wright, Pflegger, Ayers.

When he gazes at the beautiful face of America, {whose very name is beautiful!} his eyes only note blemishes.

That's not love! Yet we're constantly told by him and his wife that they "love" their country!

Which man takes a picture of his beloved that's the worst, that shows her in her worst light, that highlights a blemish on her skin, and takes that very same picture, and frames it, puts it front and center on his mantelpiece or at his office. Which man does that?

What lover highlights flaws?

Which family finds the absolute worst action photo of their kids, and blows that up for framing? Nobody does that. High school photos airbrush away blemishes, airbrush away imperfections. And those pictures get displayed.

Not in Obama's world though. The ugliness is central, constantly focused on, not overlooked, not airbrushed away, and absolutely NEVER "contextualized," as we were lectured by a sermonizing Obama, that we needed to do with Wright, {that is before he cast him under the bus, where he's sitting cheek by jowl with dear old Grandma}.

Whose memory is the more accurate, the one where the blemish is swept away, or the one where the blemish is zeroed in on?

Which is the more charitable, the more truthful, ------------------------------- but far more importantly, -------------------------- which is the more "transcendent?"

The eyes of the PASSIONATE burn through blemishes, and take no note of them. love isn't "blind," rather love gazes through to the essentials! Love cuts to the chase!

The man that sees only imperfections is no man that loves, is no man that burns with passion for a beloved, ----------------------------------------- and to me, ---------------------------- is no man worth the knowing.

No man sits in the aisles of Wright, for a week, who loves this country, THIS AMERICA!.

This is a theme expounded on by the way, by Norman Podhoretz, who wrote a great book, {which is upstairs on one of my bookshelves} and which happens to be titled, appropriately enough: "MY LOVE AFFAIR WITH AMERICA!"