third man in the Campaign?

 
                               Where is the third man?
 
Two and a half thousand years ago the Israelites were more advanced in philosophy than the Greek. OK, they dit not know the word philosophy, which is a greek one. But quite clear was put forward their statement that there is one Primary Cause, which cannot be determined by men. Up to the present day this is valid, while Plato's ideas are ultimately unspecified if not formed according visible things in the world. Moreover all the people of Israel were taught and knew about the Force which was at the beginning and should not be identified as without supreme intelligence as Creation is complicated and wonderful. With a loan word from older times that was specified, being far above man's abilities and know how, as God.
In modern science the same way of thinking suits very well without any religious connexion. This though was different with the Israelites because they did assume a most important religious aspect, namely that like before the gods were to be honoured to get in return good harvest, health for oneself and death to the enemy: to the One Superior Being were ascribed positive qualities in regard of relations with mankind.
Today in church this is little different. Believers may vary on opinion how contacts between the personal God and earthlings develop. Our brain is not sufficiently known yet. Therefore excluding communication by eye, ear, dream, spirit or atmosphere, angels or other way with the Divine has no solid base.
The Jews still expect the Messiah to come and improve the relation. Undoubtedly this person will not take care of providing the Israelis with bigger cars while driving the Arabs into the sea. The Christians believe that the Messiah is messenger of God depicting Him as a caring father. So in the New Testament our status is raised from servants to children. The latter sit at the table together with the father and have some access to his wallet. Remember that in the Middle East the expression "father and son" often does not mean a physical relationship but stresses same opinion and same conduct.
 
The article in the WSJ of friday august 15 on tax plans of Obama shows that this candidate for the US presidency does not belong to such a "family" with God. Since Darwin we know about evolution of the body. Presently is assumed that also a spiritual evolution is going on, which needs experiencing illness, poverty and other things called bad. Otherwise we would become kind of zombies, not possessing a living heart feeling emotions, not "created after the image of God" but almost like a machine. That's exactly how Obama poses for the camera: One sees a happy, contented family with a hundred thousand dollar income; not like the majority of the Americans of which many are really poor, both in dollars and in spirit, not receiving proper education. Which of course should continue permanently, just like the doctor needs in order to do his job with best results.
In the article is explained that Obama will not really change the situation with very rich people separated from the lower categories, for he does not intend to get them at the same table by appropriate taxation, that will take away the feudal "lordship" status from the millionaires. In other words Barack Obama is not a real democrat.
 
In normal healthy democracy the people decide on main topics by referenda or meetings, after which parliament or congress takes care of working out and daily controll. This reflects that everybody is born free and with equal rights like art 1 of the UNO declaration on human rights tells. Or was expressed already in the Bible by descendancy from Adam. Who will deny that everybody is entitled to participating in counceling and decisionmaking, p.e. by such referenda? Refusal is not said in word but done in deeds by Congress! The majority of the Americans earns less than the average income per head. Only one percent of the population grabs 22% of national income in this country and add to this influence from such a huge amount of money. Obama sits on the upper range. In general it is no good to vote a person who earns more than you do yourself since his interest are proven not to ly on nearing each other. When he did not do so in the past why should you trust him to do so in future?
The majority of the Americans presently is forced to do what the rich and the influential categories decide. That 's not what the Constitution meant! Cahnge is urgently needed ond don't be hypnotized by those in power with words like threatening communism. Prefer reading the story of Eve who wanted to climb the ladder to superiority and like God has controll over human beings she wanted to grasp the same a big bit. Obama seems to be a heathen who goes to church in order to be taken good care of after big buying and spending possibilities on Earth. He is companion of many millionaires in this respect. Who despise the Commandment to reshare (after fifty years in the biblical context or now gradually via sufficient taxation) in order to give the looser a new chance but especially to provide youth with equal starting positions. Old Pentecoste in Israel was sharing first products of the new harvest; capitalists give only after own pockets have been filled. One of the Ten Commandments is that thou shallt not want the ox of the neighbour. For he needs it to plough. Otherwise there won't be income from his land. Multinationals try to get all oxes in own stable. When Boaz fell in love with beautiful Ruth the farmer was not allowed to pick up what accidentally fell to the ground during the harvest. For that was to the poor and the animals. But most people eat from bio-industry nowadays, not allowing the animals sun and rain. While one of the Commandments clearly gives sabbath to animals under human controll, which is strolling around at leisure in a natural environment. Priest and reverend say that in psalm 8 a better translation from the original is that man is ambassador of God instead of ruling (and suppressing) in the world. Every third child means more bio-industry. Fortunately it is possible to trace parents by DNA.
The state is needed to intervene when some steal from others, whether money, car, job, but also from Nature and spoiling it. The state must organize that the stronger shoulders have the bigger burdens. However both Mc Cain and Obama are no good in this: The rich men take a taxi as the cost of it is but a dime on their budget, while the poor man cannot even afford such transport when he has sore legs. They won't change this. Obama too wants to protect the millionaires and the billionaires. He is not up to one table from which everybody gets sufficient food of good quality. Many so called christians do not want such a table; in church they share only a tiny piece of bread and then hurry home to consume steak or meatball in apartheid. Is that good preparation for the table in heaven? Perhaps they won't arrive there.
 
The opinion of the Greek was that one had to accept the situation in society as it came. They made no progress compared to the Israelites. Later the Messiah called for brotherhood in stead of exploiting people.
Humain par la sagesse
de Dieu le Créateur
nous cherchons en noblesse
la liberté d'tout coeur.
Le droit pour chaque tête
s'appelle égalité;
sur Terre se rend une fête
plein de fraternité.
So at next presidential election a quite different candidate than Obama and Mc Cain is needed. It is the responsability of the intellectuals to find such a person, if not in the States then from abroad. In the White House he will end capitalism which is aimed at own profit and such unlimited even if harming other creatures. He will work on coöperative companies producing what the world needs, which is not too big cars dragging iron all around and causing energy crisis. The same for heavy iron containers which are like "invented" by insurance companies. He will see see to it that wild flora and fauna get sufficient territory, to which present states have to shrink. Like Antarctica is kept humanfree and under international controll the Amazone forest, parts of the Northamerican prairies, east-Siberia, the Sahara, the Himalaya and the Dreamland of the Australian Aboriginals will be cut loose from states and be kept as natural reservates.
Those now rich shall work like everybody else "with sweat on their foreheads", doing also their share in dirty work. This brings closer to God as explained in the Holy Book. Obviously it is not read by Obama and his companions with open eyes. He is not worthy to become president of the USA.
On the international scene nothing is heard from Obama on correcting the Washington false act of allowing Jakarta to seize Papualand and have its culture attacked by massive immigration. That's like white Europeans or black Africans invade Indian reservates and dominate there. This man won't be fit to guide the world on the road of freedom and democracy.
Then where is the third man or woman?
 

---

"harmony" or freedom

Some say that Obama, although heard and seen often in the Campaign, is still rather unknown to them. They mean that it is not sure what he stands for. Evidently he wants to raise income tax for the 1% of the population that lays hands on 22% of national income. This to create better living conditions for the poor as the rich were free to do so but did not. Also he is bound to the Constitution, made for freedom in America, which is not exploiting the widow and the orphan.
Mc Cain on the contrary is old and won't change much his mind anymore, which obviously is directed on maintaining the status quo between haves and the rest. Between rich and poor a gap exists that he is not intending to bridge for balanced increase of wealth of the nation as a whole. The USA will prosper more when opportunities for jobs, especially in the middle and higher ranks become available as well to the lower class. Man is egocentric, egoistic and without correcting interference of the government he will try to reserve the best positions for himself, his family, his class and friends; reducing training for others to handle top management. Mc Cain is content with an elite running the economic world and profiting from it. He thinks the middle class should support his policy. He is even eager to have it preached abroad with words and occasionally with military power.
It is not a healthy world when those who possess the money dictate economics. Their aim always is to make the gap bigger between what they own and what others are allowed to in handling affairs. Today and yesterday and before they had splendid opportunities to become more social, do some sharing and sit at the same dinner table in stead of overeating greedily in expensive rerstaurants while fellow-men stand in the row for food stamps.
No one dies from hunger in the USA. Will Obama as the most powerful person when in the White House take care of mondial food distribution or at least find measures that can be worked out regionnally in countries where help is needed? Most probably yes if he does help the poor in own country already. Because no one knows how next harvest will be specification on this theme is not possible yet. A good policy would be to make parents fully responsible for feeding their children and get them education. Parents are fully traceable now! To this purpose the grown up people should receive adequate means without making them beggars. Big numbers of children are to be avoided and sanctioned as such harms the domain of wild flora and fauna and causes rejectable bio-industry.

"Man cannot live from bread alone"'
How democratic are the presidential candidates? Mc Cain firmly believes in the free market, that is a decisive role for money in economic, in daily life. Since some have thick wallets while those of others are almost empty not the same influence can be exerted. But the principle of true democracy is that humans are equals, although gifted with different talents. Therefore in elections each vote has the same weight. This is what Obama stresses, and considers far more important than the amount of money one has at his disposal, to realize well-functioning democracy. Not so Mc Cain, for after elections those with money, with big capital, will grab power again when he gets into the White House.
Can democratic content be measured from foreign policy? Certainly, because people belonging to other nations, living in other countries are equals too. The correct attitude is to respect them fully and help suppressed people gain freedom.
 
Barack Obama lived a few years in Indonesia when he was young and knows about the situation there. Let's analyze what policy he is to have regarding Jakarta, the Indonesian capital which controlls a vast area, stretching from Atjeh on northern Sumatra to Papua near Australia. First pay attention to history: On several islands of the archipelago in ancient times emerged kingdoms with feudal structure. Then dutch traders came from Europe and to enhance production of valuable items like rubber they brought under colonial rule the whole archipelago gradually during the nineteenth century. Some Indonesians, like Sukarno, got western education and this man, out for power, cooperated with the almost defeated Japanese in august 1945 to get rid of the dutch, who behaved like an elite, though caring for many things and therefore cooperating with local indigenous chiefs. If Sukarno would have shown a little bit patience then within a decade full independence could have been realized without the war, by The Hague called pacifying police action, which raged from 1945 till 1949. Later Sukarno started war with neighbours when the economic situation at home deteriorated and he needed some success. That was not what he got, except transfer to Indonesia of the western half of New Guinea, where the Papua's were preparing for independence and helped so by the Netherlands and Australia. American president Kennedy played an evil role, denying those people their natural right to handle own affairs independently. This has not been corrected since. At the time Indonesia was still mainly dependent on agriculture and about a million persons emigrated from overpopulated Java to  Papua, while the Indonesain soldiers kept the protesting Papuas at distance. Today Java can absorb many more people because it becomes industrialized and the unwanted migrants may return with financial aid from different sources.
Mining in Papua is very profitable and the benefits of it should not go all to the rather small population of the Papuans, but be shared with neighbouring peoples. The same is due for oil revenues anywhere if our world is to become a nice place for everybody. A treaty is to be made about sharing natural wealth in southeast Asia together with acknowledge of Papua independence. This might be under the roof of a powerful constructive organisation or federation for the whole archipelago, somehow like the European Union is functioning.
That 's just the opposite of present suppression of the Papuan desire for freedom by Jakarta's politicians and generals. Since Obama knows the situation he has to do the right things, which cannot be sitting idle if he is to be trusted. In other words here is a test case and let him speak out. All other peoples in the world dominated by foreign rule will look to this and get new hope if Obama is sincere. Remember the story of Eve who wanted to be a bit like God which means becoming master over other people. Such behaviour was not blessed but rejected. Let it be put quite clear: If Barack Obama fails regarding normal really democratic policy towards the country in which he lived several years then he is not worth to be in the Oval Room. The old man Mc Cain did not make progress in his lifetime and still thinks that the world turns on money and military power. Democracy is not his priority. The Americans and the World need the best president in the White House. If it happens that a stranger, a foreigner will serve best then let it be so!
See for ambitions of man, explained with the fallen angel, the english version of Joost van den Vondel's theater play Lucifer on this site.

Possibly an Ark with a Round Table is going to be constructed in old Amsterdam, Europe. Invited there will be peoples and nations to discuss their problems an find solutions as the combined states, the UNO in New York often fail. Alread to this purpose the UNPO, organisation of unrepresented peoples, exists. This or a similar organisation needs more status in order to draw quarreling and fighting religious and political as well economic factions to the Round Table. Less military personnel will have to be send out then! Such status can be obtained with a palace or the mentioned Ark (the first Ark was Noah's vessel used for survival). If we are lucky the guests at the Round Table will be stimulated by a good "Ark-president", whose influence may superseed that of the Washington White House inhabitant.
Also in the Ark can proceeded with adding to art 1 of the Declaration on human Rights (everybody is born free and with equal status) a material component, p.e. the right to possess a place for dwelling or staying without others, mainly the rich, draining money from it.  

---

contribution to the Campaign

Whot on Erth
                   will change when Mc Cain settles in the White House?
 
Republican president Bush lowered the taxes for the very rich and has a budget deficit of about 400 billion dollar.
To bridge that deficit every American may help and is free to lend the government money. For example when you buy for a million dollar state bonds you 'll receive several tens of thousands dollars interest. As Mc Cain made sure that he will not raise income tax this is a great opportunity for the American people to get back something from the Treasury. Obama would do it the other way: take from you by increasing taxes and impoverish the citizens.
Never before the USA as a whole was so rich like today and to keep going on investments a government should not take away the money from those who can invest and are concious of their great responsability. About 1% of the population receives presently 22% of national income and under Mc Cain this will stay so or even increase in order to ensure the necessary capital investments. Without investment no return and the country would fall back to lower national income. Europe and Asiatic powers shall overtake our country then and for the USA only a secondary role is left.
That 's the prospect Barack Obama brings with him, for he seems to be friend to persons that do not want to work and live parasitic on social security, touching several hundreds of dollars per month which have to be earned first by others. It has always been America's strength that everybody is free to raise own income by hard work, even if starting bringing round the paper, and when retired one has a right to profit from his gained millions.
 
How about the budget deficit? Will it continue under Mc Cain? Certainly not as spending by the state is going to lessen. Each person is responsible for himself and his material situation in the first place. Only when dangers from abroad like at present from some Asiatic countries threaten then we have to unite under command of the White House, where an experienced person should be president. By the way the spending on military does employ many citizens at home and even the undertakers may increase their business.
In short the budget deficit will disappear. Not by grabbing money from you like Obama is planning but by responsible spending which excludes throwing money away to those who sit idle and expect all from the state. For good understanding the 1% that gets 22% of national income is not idle as their money works for them. Probably you know from the streets in your own town how many people who got education at schools paid by the community when reaching working age refuse to contribute to the wealth of the nation and pay none tax. Compare this to the level of income tax at the top range which is the very considerable amount of about 40%. Obama wants to increase the latter to 60% and so sharing of the burden will become quite dishonest. Instead maybe a small increase of indirect taxes, p.e. VAT will be realized by the Mc Cain presidency to reduce the budget deficit at once. This type of tax hurts everybody in an equal way, or even the rich more as they spend bigger. Mc Cain is honest and tells what you can expect to have a good future. However Obama intends to take money from the Americans, which naturally involves loss of the citizens possibilities and responsability. The latter is transferred to the government in the federal capital, as if there more clever brains operate than in your own head.
Exactly this is what Obama is up to: he wants to govern in such a way that low class persons get from the rich via the state Treasury what is not earned by those unwilling-to-work people themselves. It is normal that those who do work hard get the benefits of their labour and America should stay a free country in which everybody can choose if he wants to work hard and become rich. This is not a state affair as suggested by Obama.
Precisely this is what will happen with a democratic Obama in the White House and you should prevent it: He 'll make law to transfer money and opportunities from the well-to-do towards outcasts and their kind. As if law is meant to protect the weaker party against the stronger, the rich, the cunning, the mean, the criminal who not only evades tax but steals too. The opposite must be valid in our country: free competition like in sports and may the best man win. Law must help protect those who provide lending for bridging statal budget deficit, amongst others due to the presence of the American banner in bad countries oversea, and to provide capital for investment which will enrich the country and help maintain America as a superpower, not dependent of weird social theories from communist origin.
The mismanagement which is expected from Obama in a governing role can be avoided by the voters. Have Mc Cain chosen and he 'll see to it that you and your money are free to do as you like. If you don't have money things are neither difficult and just stay home at election day. For Mc Cain is ready to take care and fullfill all your righteous wishes. Trust Him!
 

---