If you listen to Obama’s speeches before he was elected and analyse them, you will realize that he said very little. He only delivered impassioned, unintelligent statements. He never gave an explanation of his intentions or his plan of action. It was almost like the preface to an unfinished film. He spoke mainly in an emotive manner, speaking of optimism without ever explaining how that hope might be realized.
He coined the phrase “the century of change,” which has been used in academics for the past few decades and in universities. Change is good, which was written as a new tagline for him, replaced his old one. A simple “Wait a minute” query should be asked by any moron. What modification are you referring to? He had no idea what the shift would entail, so how could he be in favor of it? It might work against you. However, he had the populace celebrating as George Orwell once stated, “A sheep has four good legs and two bad.” The individuals who followed him began to repeat the statement, “Change is good.” Regarding changes, what kind are we discussing?
Is it the loss of sovereignty? Is it the fact that we are blending into an international institution? A world government system? In a system where America is not only bankrupt and the world’s most indebted country due to its lending to other nations and its role as global policeman, but Obama also wanted to lead the way in sustainability and carbon taxation by setting an example for the rest of the world to follow. He urged everyone to give up whatever they owned. He meant that these adjustments are beneficial. This plan was not his idea. He was a member on the Council on Foreign Relations which comes from the Cecil Rhodes Society.
The planned world governments use Britain as a model for the British empire, which would have become the American empire in a manner. They are all involved in major international issues, and the reforms he discussed are about a New World of Servitude where you work for and serve the World State.
Voting is a scam in the game of pretense (5)
If you listen to Obama’s speeches before he was elected and analyse them, you will realize that he said very little. He only delivered impassioned, unintelligent statements. He never gave an explanation of his intentions or his plan of action. It was almost like the preface to an unfinished film. He spoke mainly in an emotive manner, speaking of optimism without ever explaining how that hope might be realized.
He coined the phrase “the century of change,” which has been used in academics for the past few decades and in universities. Change is good, which was written as a new tagline for him, replaced his old one. A simple “Wait a minute” query should be asked by any moron. What modification are you referring to? He had no idea what the shift would entail, so how could he be in favor of it? It might work against you. However, he had the populace celebrating as George Orwell once stated, “A sheep has four good legs and two bad.” The individuals who followed him began to repeat the statement, “Change is good.” Regarding changes, what kind are we discussing?
Is it the loss of sovereignty? Is it the fact that we are blending into an international institution? A world government system? In a system where America is not only bankrupt and the world’s most indebted country due to its lending to other nations and its role as global policeman, but Obama also wanted to lead the way in sustainability and carbon taxation by setting an example for the rest of the world to follow. He urged everyone to give up whatever they owned. He meant that these adjustments are beneficial. This plan was not his idea. He was a member on the Council on Foreign Relations which comes from the Cecil Rhodes Society.
The planned world governments use Britain as a model for the British empire, which would have become the American empire in a manner. They are all involved in major international issues, and the reforms he discussed are about a New World of Servitude where you work for and serve the World State.