nemokc's thoughts

DEAR OCCUPANT: An Open Letter to the White House

2009-07-03T01:12:00.001-05:00

I was watching the news and thinking of what an incredibly difficult time the White House has had. They walked into a financial crisis of unbelievable proportions. They had the entire Iraq War/Guantanamo Bay/Torture/etc. issue left on their plate as well. And in both cases, I believe that the situation was much worse in reality than they believed it was during the campaign. They discover that much of the legal work of the previous administration's Justice Department looks like it came from first year law students homework papers. Causing the new Justice Department to drop several very important criminal cases.

They have dealt with constant right wing attacks and more media attention than any President other than Bush 43. (Don't forget to call block Rep. Cantor & the rest of the Republicans. Because you obviously haven't spent enough time and energy coming to a middle ground with the Right. Then don't forget answering to the Left when you take time to talk to the Right and come away empty handed.)

Take time to initiate legislation on Health Care, Energy and put together a budget. Don't forget those damned press dinners that you're supposed to be funny at...without stepping on anybody's sensibilities.

Add in North Korea, Iran, Flu, Flood and a few other miscellaneous disasters and you have a very tired and worn administration.

And we're ONLY six months into the Obama administration!!!! (And you're surprised they haven't been perfect? Let's be greatful for what HAS been accomplished!)

There is lots of room to disagree with the President on any number of issues, but it is important to realize that they have accomplished a great deal with a staff that is only half confirmed and the other half appointed by Bush 43. It is also important that they realize that we support them in general even when we disagree on specifics.

Please feel free to copy this letter and e-mail to the White House to show your support for their efforts.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Occupant:

I don't know who you are. You may be a steward with one too many events today. You may be a Secret Service agent tired of the steady stream of visitors. You may be a First Lady who wants to walk around her back yard garden without a press commentary on her fashion sense! Maybe you're a line cook who's tired of the many events the White House seems to host. You could be a tired assistant to the Press Secretary who secretly dreams that the next time a reporter asks a question concerning the President's smoking habits you look at them and say, "Are you high????" You could be the gardener who's sick of people trampling your lawn. Maybe you are one of the many White House children who would really like an extra hour with their mommy or daddy. Maybe you're the Mommy or Daddy wanting that extra hour with your child! You could be anyone.

You are an occupant of the White House. A White House, whose head of household is undertaking a historic revision of our society at a time of great peril to our nation. (No wonder you're under constant attack.) But more important than the current head of household historic nature, is the fact that you are the physical representation of our great nation. We as a nation embody great diversity in color, religion and philosophy. And you are part of the public face of America.

Thank you for your service. And always remember, we will disagree often with your current head of household. We will voice our opinion with certainty and understanding that even if we disagree with his actions, he has the best interests of our country at heart. And always remember that we recognize both his effort and your service.

Keep this note. Pull it out as needed to remind yourself why you do this...because it's important! Pass this along to some other White House occupant in need of a smile. (Rumor has it that this message is best received when crumbled in a ball and thrown at the head of the recipient!)

Sincerely,

A grateful American

ALLAH AKBAR

2009-06-20T00:22:00.000-05:00

It's midnight in America as I write this. It's 9:30 in the morning in Tehran. The world waits in desperate hope that the streets of Tehran do not run with the blood of it's people before the sun sets. The rooftops have echoed all night with the sounds of the people shouting "Allah Akbar" or "God is Great". This was the cry of the 1979 Revolution in Iran. A warning to the secular ruler of Iran that God is greater than even the leaders of the country. And now it is a cry of warning to the religious leadership to remember the same warning. God is greater than even the religious leaders of the nation.

For the past week, we have watched the events in Iran unfold. We have heard stories of beatings, riots, marches and protest. We have read the words of the people on Twitter and somehow have suddenly found ourselves bonded to the people of Iran. But there is little we can do in practical terms.

We stare at the photos that have surfaced on the web. The women who stand defiant before the police in their hajib imploring the police to remember that they are all Iranians. The old men who march silently in protest of an election they feel was stolen. The young ones who fight back when the police try to make them disperse.

We hear stories of teens who hunt the Basij (a volunteer militia who has violently attacked the reformers) and kill them in the street.

On Friday, the Supreme Leader of Iran declared the election to be valid. He ordered the people to stop protesting in the streets. He has declared that future marches will be met with violence. The next march is scheduled for today at 6:30 AM our time. A bloodbath seems inevitable.

And we in the West wait in outraged silence. Because there is nothing else we can do. We will not commit troops to protect the citizens. Our cries of outrage are presented to the people as "interference" and the supporters of Ahmadineja (who are numerous) believe it Our words do nothing more than incite them to increase their support of the religious leadership of Iran. Because they still remember that in 1953, the United States overthrew thier government and they have not forgiven us for our meddling.

It is a unique point in the relationship between our countries. Half a world separates us. Language and religion define our differences. We think of them as "the Evil Empire" and they still see us as the "Great Satan". But perhaps we as Americans have finally seen enough to realize that there is there is much that joins us together in the name of humanity.

I do not know what will happen at today's march...but we must never again forget that not every Iraqi or every Muslim is evil. They are humans like us, with beliefs and familys, fears and hopes. Let us pray tonight that God in whatever form he takes remembers the people of Iran.

ALLAH AKBAR!

Poker & Pay-Go: An "All In" Bet

2009-06-14T03:29:00.003-05:00

I’m a degenerate! At least, that’s what they tell me.

Why am I a degenerate? I’m a degenerate because I like to play games. Not just any games…but one particular game. A game that is as American as apple pie and cowboys. I’m a poker player. I’m one of an estimated 15 million Americans who regularly play poker online.

People who don’t play will tell you that poker is game of luck played in smoke-filled rooms by old men who curse as they lose their life savings on the turn of a bad card. People who don’t play will tell you tales of children who steal their parent’s credit card to run up enormous charges that cost them the family home. People who don’t play will tell you that it’s a sin to gamble because soldiers threw dice during the Crucifixion. (And any poker player will tell you that it’s one thing to figure odds on making a flush….but only crazy people bet dice!)

But the people I play with on line will tell you other stories. They will tell you how they work in remote locations and online poker is how they relax in the middle of nowhere. They will tell you that they are disabled vets from Iraq & Afghanistan and this is a sport they can still play like a man. They will tell you they live on a fixed income and the lower stakes tables available online (some as low as $0.01/$0.05) are affordable where a live casino is not. They will tell you they are college math majors who buy their books off of their winnings. They will tell you that if I am a degenerate for playing poker….there’s currently 35,980 fellow degenerates online with me on my favorite site as I type this!

There is a difference between games of chance and games of skill. When you walk into a casino you have many opportunities to try your luck. Slot machines, roulette, craps tables and even Blackjack are games that are played against the house. These house games have certain rules that can affect the outcome of the wager. Like the dealer stands on 17 in Blackjack or the slot machine is designed to pay out a certain percentage of the time. Poker is unique in that it is played against other players…not the house. You can win with a bad hand by betting large amounts at a player you know is too scared to call you. You can control your destiny on a poker table with a few good “reads” on your fellow players and rudimentary math knowledge. Because that’s what poker is all about…math and people. As the saying goes, “Play the people, not the cards!”

But in 2006, George Bush signed into law the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA) which the government insists prohibits my rights to play a game online that all participants entered willingly into.

The UIGEA was attached to the Safe Ports Act to satisfy the conservative religious base of the GOP. Its’ passage was justified because prohibition of internet gambling would keep minors from playing, prevent problem gamblers from gambling and poker sites could not be used to launder terrorist money! (Seriously that’s what it’s supposed to do!)

So let’s examine these claims of the benefits of prohibition. (Remember prohibition has such a wonderful track record of success in America.) Even with the passage of UIGEA, the U.S. still represents the largest percentage of Internet poker players world wide. And since the UIGEA offers no enforcement on mandatory age limits or limits players with gambling addictions, its’ usefulness is highly questionable. Its’ success relies on keeping people from participating. (Good luck with that!) Even Department of Justice attorneys will admit that the law they are trying to enforce is so poorly written that it creates more problems than it solves. For instance, while it differentiates between games of “skill” and games of “chance”, it doesn’t define either term. The lack of definition leaves poker in a legal limbo. But the religious right wants to make sure that I (and millions of Americans like myself) follow their personal religious beliefs in lockstep! And they don’t believe in Poker!

Now the only real issue that should be of concern to Americans as a whole (as opposed to issues of concern to those of us who actually play poker) is the aspect of money laundering for terrorists. This was actually what got the UIGEA passed originally. What politician up for re-election wants to vote against a law that keeps terrorists from getting funding? It never matters during a heated election that the law was a bad law, what matters is you are on the record as supporting Muslim terrorists if you vote against UIGEA. But again, success depends upon people not playing poker online….and millions do every day! (Sadly, the poker sites themselves can easily monitor games for discrepancies that would indicate money laundering, but UIGEA doesn’t require them to do that.)

During his confirmation hearing, Attorney General Holder was asked if he would enforce the UIGEA. His reply was that he would because it was the law of the land. And last week, the Justice Department seized an estimated $34-36 million dollars in online poker payouts.

Now I’m not complaining about that. It was to be expected. A court battle will help clear up the issue. Poker sites have replaced the money in the accounts of the recipients and alternate ways to distribute winnings will be made available. But this does bring to light one very important aspect of online poker that could have an impact on ALL Americans. That $36 million dollars was only one week of payouts. It is estimated that over $16 billion dollars is held in the accounts of online poker sites. That’s a lot of money being taxed overseas and not here at home. In fact, it is estimated that over $3 billion dollars a year in tax revenues could be gained by legalizing online poker. (And that’s a conservative estimate!) With our country running record deficits, it only seems prudent to make use of this additional source of federal and state revenue.

Currently there is legislation pending in the House that would establish clear guidelines for internet poker. The Internet Gambling Regulation Consumer Protection and Enforcement Act of 2009 (H.R. 2267) would:

“establish a federal regulatory and enforcement framework under which Internet gambling operators could obtain licenses authorizing them to accept bets and wagers from individuals in the U.S., on the condition that they maintain effective protections against underage gambling, compulsive gambling, money laundering and fraud, and enforce prohibitions or restrictions on types of gambling prohibited by states, and Indian Tribes.”

Basically, this proposed law would not only provide protection to internet gamblers, it would also tax and regulate the industry providing much needed revenue for the Obama administrations many new programs. With the current push to “pay as you go” on all new programs, legalizing poker could be a definite win/win for all concerned.

So even if you are not a poker player, pick your favorite proposed program requiring funding. Then call your Congressman and tell them that you want your favorite program funded with poker money. All they need to do is to support H.R. 2267!

WITHOUT SIN

2009-06-01T01:07:00.003-05:00

On Sunday, May 31, 2009 at 10:00 AM, a man (allegedly from Merriam, KS) walked into the Reformation Lutheran Church of Wichita Kansas. He shot and killed an usher; turned and walked out, threatening two other people as he was leaving.

It is a sad story. It is even sadder when you realize that many “Christians” are rejoicing in the death of this usher who was shot in God’s house. The usher was Dr. George Tiller. He ran an abortion clinic in Wichita and was one of the few providers of “late-term” abortions in this country.

Comments on one conservative website include these:

A-hole vs a-hole, no humans involved. Maggot doc done for and maggot killer headed to prison forever...a 2-fer.
dusty @ 3:01 PM CDT, May 31, 2009

We have removed consequences for thought and action from the equation, from not keeping score at kids sporting events to people being able to make racist comments and still be recommended to the Supreme Court. Hopefully, there will be more "culling of the herd".
Craig Knapp @ 3:00 PM CDT, May 31, 2009

Oh well! A little more life will go on without his life.
toby hill @ 2:59 PM CDT, May 31, 2009

For too long we Christians have been held down by the godless liberals! We need to arise and establish Jesus Christ as the leader of this country. Catholics, Jews and Muslims must convert or leave!
Christians Fight Back @ 2:42 PM CDT, May 31, 2009

Why is everyone upset over one more "late term abortion"? He lived 64 more years than his victims!
Fred @ 2:42 PM CDT, May 31, 2009

Thank God I hope Tiller rots in hell
Tom Mahlum @ 2:41 PM CDT, May 31, 2009

HEY, WAIT TIL THEY GET YOU TO THE EMBALMING ROOM, YOU NEED TO BURN IN HELL... THE FELLOW THAT KILLED YOU IS A HERO
TILLER DEAD, I AM SO HAPPY @ 5:47 PM CDT, May 31, 2009

THANK GOD, BABIES CAN LIVE NOW BECAUSE TILLER TILLER THE BABY KILLER IS DEAD, HOPE YOU BURN IN HELL ALONG WITH YOUR STUPID FAMILY!!!
BABIES CAN LIVE @ 5:43 PM CDT, May 31, 2009

This is what the most vocal Christians are saying! And I simply can’t (or won’t allow myself) to believe that this is what most Christians think about violent attacks in the name of Jesus. But all too often, Christians (like Muslims) refuse to call out their own for terrorist acts that reflect poorly on their real beliefs. And that is what the murder of Dr. Tiller is….domestic terrorism. You do not have to agree with his profession, you can question his morals, but the act of his murder is a separate issue from his occupation and should be addressed as such.

Many years ago, when I still attended a fundamentalist church, I was taught that God viewed all sin equally. Man might think one “sin” ranked as more evil than another, but God sees all sin as wrong….without degree!

As I thought about the doctor’s death, I remembered a story I had read many years ago. About another sinner who “deserved death” and the response given by the “man” asked to comment on her sin!

John Chapter 8
1Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

I wonder, what would Jesus think of Dr. Tiller and his murderer? Would he be proud of the comments of his followers? Would he rejoice in the actions done in his name today? If Jesus really does someday return in the “blink of an eye”, what do you want him to read on your last blog? Or are you so “without sin” that you’re not really worried?

Now is the time for all Christians regardless of your positon on abortion, to raise your voice in protest to those who would kill others in YOUR name!

It's Raining....

2009-05-25T13:28:00.002-05:00

It's raining today. I've heard a lot of complaints about the weather. It's ruined our weekend at the lake, it's too cold to use the pool, I wanted to grill outdoors today, so forth and so on.

We have reached a point in our culture, where today is the "SUMMER KICKOFF" weekend and not the day of remembrance it should be. Today is the day that we should all take time to remember those that have given their life in the service of their country. Four thousand, nine hundred and sixty two so far in Iraq and Afghanistan.

There are those who have blogged today about the innocent who die in war. The so-called "collateral damage" that accompanies any war. And make no mistake...those deaths are not to be minimalized. Every Iraqi child killed during the "liberation" of Iraq had someone who mourned their loss as bitterly as the mother of any soldier. A great deal of time could be spent in discussing whether those deaths were justified. BUT NOT TODAY!

Today is the day when we as a nation should honor the memory of our fallen sons and daughters. Whether we agreed with their mission, today is a day that we collectively take responsibility for thier blood. We as a people elected the officials that set the missions and authorize the funds. We as a people offered the lives of our children up as a testament to our collective ideals. And they go! And they die! And (for better or worse) they change the world on our behalf. For that service and sacrifice on this day we honor their memory.

Today we do not debate the merits of the job they do at our behest, but honor the blood they shed at our request. Because even when the mission itself is questionable or not well thought out....American Armed Services are on the ground doing thier job! We owe them respect for that.

It's a somber and gloomy day. It's raining...and perhaps that is appropriate. Even the heavens should weep for the loss of our soldiers.

And after we have reflected upon the blood that we have spilled, perhaps we as a nation will remember how precious that blood is. Tomorrow we will think about the loss before we commit the troops. Perhaps we will be certain that the loss is justified by the mission. Perhaps we will remember that war is a reality and not a B-movie! The extras don't get up after the filming and have coffee. In the real world we bury our children in war!

God Speed to our fallen countrymen! Our prayers go to your families. And thank you!

NOTRE DAME: An American Experience

2009-05-21T03:59:00.000-05:00

On Sunday, President Obama gave the Commencement Address to approximately 3,000 graduates at Notre Dame and was given an honorary law degree. It was controversial because the President has supported a women’s right to choose. It was controversial because Catholic Universities have been asked not to bestow honors on pro-choice speakers, yet Notre Dame has given many past presidents an honorary degree. Their decision to give the President that honor has cost them an estimated $13 million dollars in alumni funding. Many students wore cards on the top of their graduation caps that showed a cross with two baby foot prints to the on looking cameras. Approximately 30 students skipped the ceremony to participate in a prayer vigil during the ceremony.

The ceremony had the potential of being a political nightmare for the President and a disastrous memory for graduates and their parents. Instead it was a beautiful reminder of what is best about our country!

What happened? Thirty-seven protestors outside were arrested for trespassing. The President of the University spoke on why he felt it important to listen to opposing views. He also gave strong voice to the fact that Catholics strongly oppose Obama’s stance on stem cell research and abortion. President Obama’s speech was interrupted three times by protesters yelling from inside the stadium. Each time they were shouted down by students. No graduates walked out in protest. And a graduating class was urged to “find a way to live together as one human family”.

During his speech, President Obama looked at one of the great questions of modern political discourse:

“The question, then, is how do we work through these conflicts? Is it possible for us to join hands in common effort? As citizens of a vibrant and varied democracy, how do we engage in vigorous debate? How does each of us remain firm in our principles, and fight for what we consider right, without demonizing those with just as strongly held convictions on the other side?”

And that was the beauty of last Sunday afternoon…an honest discussion was held on abortion without either side “demonizing” the other. Yes, there was protest! But that is part of being an American. Yes, there were people attempting to disrupt the ceremony…but they left quietly after their moment of civil disobedience. (And as someone who once disrupted a Chancellor’s inauguration…who am I to complain about that?) There were students who chose to boycott the ceremony, but that was their right as an American. (And while I do not agree with their viewpoint, I respect their integrity.) The students who wore the cross on their caps silently & respectfully stood up to one of the most popular Presidents of modern times. It became a unique opportunity to put into action the principals that they had spent the last four years learning at this Jesuit institution.

And in the face of this opposition, President Obama spoke of the importance of avoiding “caricature” when debating policy in America. He did not duck the issue but talked of finding common ground that we can agree on. Instead of laying claim to a battleground of differences, he asked us to consider issues with “Open hearts, open minds, fair words.”

He correctly assessed that we will never all agree on the abortion debate. But what we CAN agree on is the idea that we can actively work to decrease abortions. We must not make Doctors who are pro-life to perform abortions to keep their jobs. We must help to make adoption easier and to provide health care to expectant mothers who choose to keep their child. Common ground found through “fair words”. If only we could do the same all the time with the issues that divide us as Americans.

It was a great AMERICAN day filled with voices of opposition raised not in anger but in hope of making tomorrow a better day. Fifty years from now those graduating seniors will remember fondly last Sunday. It gave me hope and made me proud to be an American!

STICKS & STONES

2009-05-14T00:32:00.002-05:00

Next week the Republican National Committee will be holding a special meeting. By "special", I mean that it took 16 RNC members from 16 different states and a little used procedual rule to override the objection to this meeting by Committee Chairman Steele.

The reason for this auspicious meeting? To vote on three resolutions for the party.

Resolution 1: To urge Republican lawmakers to reject earmarks. (A noteworthy purpose...are you listening Sen. Bond?)

Resolution 2: To commend Republican legislators for opposing "bailouts and reckless spending bills". (Wording that denounced Republicans Spectre, Snowe & Collins was dropped after Arlen Spectre joined the Democratic Party.)

But the main reason for calling the meeting is Resolution 3: Which "renames" the Democratic Party as the DEMOCRAT SOCIALIST PARTY.

You have to marvel at the arrogance of any group of grown men (and a few women) coming together to vote on changing the name of a rival organization. (Most people older than Junior High do not have to have a group vote to resort to name calling.) This is somewhat like Exxon-Mobile voting to refer to Greenpeace as "THE TREEHUGGERS". Or Planned Parenthood voting to refer to NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE as "NATIONAL RIGHT OF BREEDERS TO LIFE".

IT'S SILLY! STICKS & STONES!

The ever-shrinking GOP needs to realize that Americans want them to offer solutions to real problems. Formal voting for name-calling isn't going to advance their cause.

Be watching next week when Eric Cantor threatens to hold his breath until he turns blue if Obama doesn't resign from office immediately!

TOLD YOU SO!!!

2009-05-08T20:34:00.001-05:00

Towards the end of Pres. Bush's first term there was much discussion concerning Presidential Powers. Many liberals were terrified that as a nation, we were ceding too much authority to the President. The Patriot Act and FISA were debated non-stop. Those of us on the left who argued that too many civil liberties were being encroached upon in the name of "security" were laughed at. We were stupid they said, at that time, to worry about such things. After all; if you weren't doing anything wrong, you had nothing to worry about. America had been attacked and we would stop at nothing to keep Americans safe.

Now many years later, those on the Right are suddenly concerned about these same civil liberties that the Left was warning about. Back then, it was no big deal that the FBI was infiltrating anti-war meetings to spy on the Left. Now it is a VERY BIG deal that the FBI spied on the Tea Parties. On four separate occasions during the Bush administration, legislation was offered to Congress to end term limits for the President. (A very bad idea but nobody had any objections to it.) But now that same bill (which is still stuck in committee) is a plot to make President Obama dictator for life. A report from Homeland Security (requested by the Bush Administration) warns of the dangers of domestic terrorism from Right Wing Extremists. Suddenly, the idea that "Big Brother's" watching you seems Orwellian and has nothing to do with keeping the country safe from terrorist acts but is a way to confiscate our guns.

Back then, I used to say, "Don't give President Bush any authority that you would be uncomfortable with a President Hillary Clinton having!" Now I just chuckle to myself and think, "I told you so!" as I listen to the Right scream about President Obama taking over the government and turning our country into a dictatorship that endangers their Constitutional rights!

And he could you know. Because both Democrats and Republicans gave him the means to do it way back then by voting for the Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act lists the following provisions that many Americans feel infringe on civil liberties:

· INFORMATION SHARING: Allows information gained from a criminal investigation to be shared with intelligence agencies and other government departments. Sounds harmless but it allows the government to establish massive data bases on citizens who are not the target of criminal investigations.

· ROVING WIRETAPS: Allows one wiretap authorization to cover multiple devices. (I.E. Phone, cell phone, e-mail, blackberry, etc.) Many feared that the language of the act was so vague that it would lead to privacy violations on people that came into casual contact with the subject.

· ACCESS TO RECORDS: Allows almost unlimited access to business records in foreign intelligence operations. These records can include credit card records, lists of library books you have checked out, etc.

· "SNEAK & PEEK WARRANTS: These allow a suspect's home or office to be searched by the government without immediate notification. Critics of this provision argue that it is so vague that it could be used for minor crimes as well as major intelligence investigations.

· MATERIAL SUPPORT: This expanded the ban on giving assistance to terrorists to include "expert advice or assistance". The Left has always maintained that this makes "guilt by association" way too easy.

So how does this affect "Joe the Plumber" out in the "Real America"? Let's take a hypothetical example.

Joe likes collecting guns. So Joe goes to a gun show where he purchases a weapon from a dealer. He strikes up a conversation with the dealer, who seems really nice and very well informed on politics. He and the dealer exchange e-mail addresses and the dealer promises to send him some information on any new weapons he receives.

Over the next few months, Joe & the dealer exchange e-mails and phone calls. Joe even purchases a couple more weapons from the dealer. The dealer recommends some books that Joe might enjoy on politics and Survivalism. He also asks Joe for advice on a variety of subjects.

Now, unbeknownst to Joe, the dealer is also the Grand High Poobah for the Grand High Order of White Supremacists! They are secretly plotting to blow up a federal building because they are convinced that President Obama is actually a Kenyan and therefore his taxes are illegal. They are convinced that as "true Americans" it is their duty to keep America from turning Socialist.

The government has discovered this plot and they are now using provisions of the Patriot Act to look into all of the dealer's business and personal contacts. (They can do this because according to the Patriot Act, the President has the power to determine if you are an "enemy combatant", you don't have to be a foreigner to be so labeled.) During this investigation Joe the Plumber's contact with the gun dealer is discovered. And he now comes under investigation.

During a search of his home and computer, they discover a file on his computer that serves as a personal diary where he wonders if the US wouldn't be better off without Obama. He wasn't serious, just a little drunk when he typed it. Never published it or even wanted to show it to anyone. But now he is under suspicion.

E-mails show that he advised the gun dealer when asked specific questions about how to get a plumbing license. A check of credit card records show Joe has made several "payments" to the dealer. Unfortunately the dealer keeps bad books and has no records of originally owning the guns Joe bought. So it gives the appearance of Joe donating money to "the cause". Joe is guilty of offering "material support" (under the new legal definition) to the terrorists.

So Joe is picked up as an enemy combatant and "questioned" about his ties to the Grand High Order of White Supremacists. Now he has none, but they don't believe him. So they decide that he needs "extreme interrogation techniques" to make him reveal what they are certain he must know. (But don't worry....waterboarding isn't really torture!)

Now do I believe this will really happen? Of course not! But if I was as suspicious of President Obama as many on the Right are....I would be seriously rethinking the Patriot Act right now. And I am smart enough to know that in 2012 or 2016 the next President may scare me even more than President Obama scares the Right.

You see how this works. What was once heralded as legislation that would save us all from Muslim terrorists can also be used to persecute YOU for beliefs that differ from the current President. It is essential to our system of checks and balances that we give no President a power that we would not be comfortable with all presidents having.

So my question to Conservatives now is....Do you still support the Patriot Act? (Don't worry, if you're not doing anything wrong they won't bother you!)

I hope you keep in mind the next time you are worrying about how President Obama is going to come and get you....we gave him legal authority to do it. All in the name of keeping America safe!

And just in case you think my hypothetical story is really far fetched, I remind you to research the case of Steve Kurtz.

TORTURE: A PRAGMATIC VIEW

2009-05-03T03:41:00.013-05:00

Fox News got it wrong again! On a recent online webcast, Fox anchor Shepard Smith responded to a question regarding whether America should torture detainees for vital information by yelling, “We are America! I don't give a rat's ass if it helps. We are America! We do not f^*king torture!"

But the truth is that we in America have tortured to obtain information. We have tortured systematically in Afghanistan, Iraq and Quantanamo and it has been approved by the highest levels of government. As a nation, we are bitterly divided on whether torture is justified or not. Approximately half of all Americans believe that there are some situations that justify torture while half believe it is NEVER justified. (Interestingly enough, over 60% of Evangelical Christians believe it is justified…and the more often you attend church services the more likely you are to support torture. While the people least likely to support torture do not attend church at all.)

Conservatives will tell you that America's "enhanced interrogation techniques" are not REALLY torture. "It's not like there is any permanent damage and it's not as bad as what Muslims do to each other anyway." Conservatives tell you that ALL other countries torture. We're no different than they are. Conservatives will tell you that it's ok to torture because IT WORKS!

But the truth is that waterboarding has been called torture by Americans in the past. We have charged, tried, convicted and hung Japanese soldiers who waterboarded American troops. Japanese soldiers whose only crime was to "interrogate" Americans in order to extract information needed to save the lives of Japanese soldiers and civilians. Why is the crime different now than it was then?

And yes, other countries torture. But as my Grandmother used to say, "If everybody else jumped off a bridge, does it make it ok for you to?"

Liberals will tell you that torture lowers our moral standing in the world. It provides recruitment propoganda for terrorists. It endangers our troops in future combat by making it MORE LIKELY that they will be tortured if captured. But these are merely ideological arguments.

If your personal ideology says torture is wrong, none of the arguments from the Right will persuade you that it's ok. If your personal ideology says torture is OK you won't change your mind listening to me. Stop reading, plop down on your couch and put in the second season of "24" or a rerun of HBO's "Oz" or just log onto an internet gay bondage site. You can get your jollies without wasting time on justifying it.

Conservatives are right on only one point. Torture can work. It can get you information that is needed. So if we ignore the ideological reasons for torture, we must examine the pragmatic aspects of torture as a way of obtaining information.

Now I have admitted that torture can work. But just because it works does not mean that it is the BEST way to achieve your goals of obtaining information. There are a lot of problems that are associated with answers received from torture.

For one thing you get a lot of bad answers to go along with the truth. And that leaves you with the problem of which answers are true "threats" and which are made up stories told only to STOP the torture. Eventually you can sift through the lies, but the time and resources to track down all of these stories can be enormous. Remember all the security alerts that were issued almost weekly in 2004. Liberals thought Bush was making things up to keep people scared and voting Republican. Now it looks like the government was reacting to fake confessions from terrorists.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) has been a poster child for waterboarding. The Bush administration has claimed that huge amounts of information came from KSM's "interrogation sessions". But CIA analysts contend that most of it was lies resulting in massive wastes of resources to check out the lies. Said one former senior C.I.A. official, who read all the interrogation reports on K.S.M.,

“90 percent of it was total f^#king bullsh*t.” A former Pentagon analyst adds: “K.S.M. produced no actionable intelligence. He was trying to tell us how stupid we were.”

Only 10% of the information given by KSM was true and that 10% produced NO actionable intelligence. Does that justify torture? The military's Joint Personnel Recovery Agency (which oversees the SEAR program that our nation's torture policies were designed from) states, "the key deficiency of physical or psychological duress is the reliability and accuracy of the information gained...A subject in pain may provide an answer, any answer, or many answers in order to get the pain to stop,". In conclusion, the document said, "the application of extreme physical and/or psychological duress (torture) has some serious operational deficits, most notably the potential to result in unreliable information."

Torture also comes with the problem of what if the person you are torturing for information really doesn't know anything. What if he's innocent? The assumption has to be made that he is resisting interrogation which means he knows something which means you need to keep torturing to get the information that you think he's withholding and that he really doesn't know! It's pointless.

Take the case of Diliwar, a young Afghan who was arrested by the Afghan army for suspicion of being involved in a rocket attack against an American base. The US tortured him for information on his co-conspirators. He never gave them up. He continued to insist he was innocent. Eventually he died of injuries suffered during his interrogation. AFTER his death, it was discovered that he really was just a 120 pound, 22 year old kid who had driven his taxi into the wrong neighborhood. The Afghan military officer who turned him in was later arrested and charged with the actual rocket attack. Dilwar was a patsy! We killed him in an effort to obtain information that he never had.

The problem with torture is that it is never as clean as it is in the movies. The information you recieve is not necessarily good information. In the end, we have to ask ourselves as a nation, Is torture really an effective use of intelligence resources? Even if you have no moral objections, you need to be able to prove that the information that torture produces is worth the cost to our nation's ideals!

AN OPEN LETTER TO RUPERT MURDOCH

2009-04-27T16:13:00.002-05:00

Dear Mr. Murdoch:

Last Wednesday Sean Hannity during an interview with Charles Grodin offered to allow himself to be waterboarded for charity. Mr. Grodin immediately asked Mr. Hannity his availablity on Sunday. But unfortunately Mr. Hannity's schedule is apparently very full. On Thursday Keith Olbermann offered to donate $1,0000 for EVERY second that Hannity lasts to a charity that supports military families.

Mr. Hannity is a strong believer that waterboarding is NOT torture. He has said so repeatedly on his show. So obviously, this is not something that should bother him to do. In fact, he should jump at the chance to earn so much money for a worthy cause. (Think of it as elaborate charity baseball dunking with a member of the Spanish Inquisition as the pitcher!)

It is my hope that you will encourage Mr. Hannity to take Mr. Olbermann up on his offer.

Now it is common knowledge that when you fired Mr. Olbermann it cost your company an incredible amount of money to buy out his contract. This is the perfect opportunity for you to retrieve some of the money that you payed him for a good cause as opposed to letting it sit in Mr. Olbermann's bank account drawing interest. (Remember he offered $1,000/second. One minute of Mr. Hannity's time would be $60,000. Think he might be able to make it to two minutes? How long would Mr. Hannity have to last for you to get back ALL of your money...with interest?)

This would also allow YOUR network to be instrumental in PROVING the assertion that waterboarding is really NOT torture. The right wing will hail you as the type of news network that backs up what they say unlike those lousy liberal mainstream networks like MSNBC.

And don't forget the ratings that Sean Hannity will get. Millions of liberals who would normally prefer shooting thier television set to watching Fox news will be tuning in (with popcorn) to watch. You could probably get as much money for ads as the SuperBowl!

So please, Mr. Murdoch; USE YOUR INFLUENCE AS THE OWNER OF FOX NEWS TO PROVE TO ALL THE LIBERALS THAT WATERBOARDING REALLY ISN'T TORTURE. Sean Hannity DESERVES this opportunity!

Sincerely,

A concerned citizen wanting fair & balanced enhanced interrogation techniques!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOTE: Messages for Mr. Murdoch regarding this subject can be sent to teverett@newscorp.com.

CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR

2009-04-23T02:02:00.002-05:00

In December of 2005, New York Times Washington Bureau Chief Phillip Taubman met with several members of Congress to discuss an upcoming story in his paper on Bush's Warrantless Wiretapping Program. Among this group was Congresswoman Nancy Harmon(D) who at the time was urging the NYT to kill the story. This Contitutionally questionable program was vital to our National Security interests she argued.

This week it was alleged that Congresswoman Harmon was caught in a NSA wiretap agreeing to intervene in a crimininal investigation of AIPAC officials. At the other end of the phone was an Isreali agent. Ironic isn't it that the defender of an unconstitutional government eavesdropping program gets caught by a wiretap.

Now, Congresswoman Harmon says, "I support, if necessary, surveillance of people in order to prevent attacks against us. But ... surveillance has to be done consistent with our laws and the Constitution. ... I want to know, by the way, if the wiretaps were legal."

She also stated, "Let's see who else was wiretapped. I mean lots of members of Congress talk to advocacy organizations. My phone is ringing off the hook in my office from worried members who are asking whether I think it could have happened to them. I think this is an abuse of power."

She wanted warrantless wiretaps....be careful what you wish for!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On October 21, 2001 President George Bush signed into law the Patriot Act. A response to 9/11, this statute was passed by wide margins in both the House and Senate. While many Americans on the left feared it sacrificed too many civil liberties, Democrats saw it as political suicide to vote against the bill. Republicans saw it as the ONLY way to save our country from foreign terrorists. There was much rejoicing on Fox News when it passed.

On April 15, 2009 Homeland Security issued a report that has sent the Conservative Right over the edge. It details concerns that during an Obama Presidency right wing extremists could recruit returning military personnel to commit acts of domestic terrorism. To hear the blogosphere tell it, if you are Christian, pro-life, own guns or believe in small government: storm troopers from Obama will arrive at your doorstep to make you disappear into a remote prison where you will be tortured to discover who you are working with.

The sad part of this is that while I don't think President Obama would abuse his power in such a way, legally it COULD happen. The Patriot Act gives the Government the right to detain without habeas corpus ANY suspected terrorists. And the definition of terrorist under the bill includes domestic terrorism. So technically it could happen just the way the Right fears.

All because they got the terrorism protection they wanted....be careful what you wish for!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

During the Bush Presidency there was a great deal of discussion concerning the powers of the presidency. I used to tell my conservative friends, "Never give President Bush power that you would be hesitant for President Hillary Clinton to also have." Now a great many people on both the Right and the Left are looking at how we have conducted our country's business. And many are not happy with what they see. The Right SHOULD fear the Patriot Act. It gives a President unbelievable power for both protection and for dictatorship. Just because you consider one president to be responsible enough for such power, gives no guarantee that the next will be as responsible.

Democrats need to keep in mind that legislation is like a blade that can cut both ways. As they write new legislation, they need to remember...BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WISH FOR!

TOO BIG FOR HIS BRITCHES

2009-04-19T23:38:00.002-05:00

My grandmother was full of sage wisdom. She was always ready to identify any human folly with an old-fashioned saying that usually "hit the nail on the head". I often think of her when I read or hear of the latest rant from GOP Party Spokesman Rush Limbaugh. "Ignore the stupid" I can hear her say whenever I am tempted to express an opinon on some insane comment from Rush. For a long time, I have kept that advice. But finally, Rush has gone a little too far. His recent comments on torture and John McCain were wrong and deserve comment.

On April 17th, Rush was ranting about the release of torture memos from the Bush Administration. He was defending torture as necessary because Rush thinks torture works. To prove his point he took a former Vietnam POW's statements out of context.

Said Limbaugh, "The idea that torture doesn’t work– that’s been put out from John McCain on down– You know, for the longest time McCain said torture doesn’t work then he admitted in his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention last summer that he was broken by North Vietnamese. So what are we to think here?"

Now insisting that torture works is pretty twisted. But it takes a really sick mind to try proving your point by taking a war hero's words out of context. Because John McCain does NOT think torture works. Sen. McCain has written about his experiences with torture in his book, "FAITH OF MY FATHERS". Yes, he "broke" and gave them information. It was information that they already had, was outdated or that he made up.

"Eventually, I gave them my ship’s name and squadron number, and confirmed that my target had been the power plant. Pressed for more useful information, I gave the names of the Green Bay Packers’ offensive line, and said they were members of my squadron. When asked to identify future targets, I simply recited the names of a number of North Vietnamese cities that had already been bombed."

I am sure that the Vietnamese found this information extremely usefull! Probably as useful as all of the lies given to interrogators on Guantanamo.

Now we can argue whether torture works or not. We can discuss whether the President should have released the memos or not. What we should not do is to disrespect the service of a veteran and former POW by using his words out of context to "prove" a point the Senator disagrees with. What happened to respect for service?

As I recall, Rush and every other conservative was horrified by the disrespect showed Sen. McCain when it was suggested that being shot down did not necessarily qualify you to be president. That was a MAJOR issue at the time! Now, I may not believe that military service makes you Presidential but I do think it earns you a certain amount of respect for that service. And using the personal story of a POW who disagrees with you is certainly not showing proper respect. So how does Rush justify this? And why does no one on the Right call him out for it?

My grandmother had the perfect explanation. Rush is having so much fun being the "leader" of the party that he's gotten too big for his britches! And someone from his side of the aisle needs to call him on it.

A BOY AND HIS DOG

2009-04-13T22:22:00.003-05:00

Dear Senator Kennedy:

I met you once. You were speaking at a fundraiser. You are the only person I have ever heard speak who could make a cement floor vibrate with your voice. As you were leaving I watched you looking at a painting on the wall. It was one of many variations on a theme...JFK, RFK & MLK all in profile. As I watched you looking at it, I was hit with the realization of how difficult it must be to have a life as public as yours. These iconic images that grace the walls of thousands of homes across America are very real and tragic events to you. Faces that inspire us, but personal memories to you!

I have reflected often since that day on the sacrifice of public service. I think about it during every confirmation hearing that more closely resembles sharks in the water than statesmen entrusted with our country.

Truthfully, I think you have made many mistakes in your life. Mistakes both professionally and personally. That pretty much puts you on par with the rest of humanity. But unlike most of us, your life is minutely scrutinized for every mistake and every victory. I can't imagine what that costs you.

I think about you and that painting often when I watch the news coverage of the President. What an incredibly lonely job he has! I don't even want to know what it feels like to have the hopes, safety and best interests of over 300 million Americans scattered across the globe resting squarely on your shoulders....and yours alone. A responsibility magnified by the current economic collapse, two wars and an opposition party that seems more concerned with success of the party even if it is at the expense of the country.

So when I saw the photos of your present to the Obama children I was very touched. I love dogs and have two of my own. I am well aware of the importance of man's best friend to your mental health in difficult times. That's why my favorite photo was the one of a very happy President racing Bo through the halls of the White House.

I think your small, personal act of kindness may be the most magnificent gift you have given this country in your long and illustrious career. Because when times are really tough, when the most difficult decisions must be made....you have given the President a moment of refuge. And that tiny bit of escapism may serve us all for the best some day. Because dogs don't worry about world crisis, they worry about you. And regardless of whether you like or dislike the President, you want him at his best when making decisions.

Because of your kind gift, during that next crisis, for a brief moment, for the length of a 100 foot hallway...he can forget being POTUS and just enjoy being a boy and his dog.

Thank you for that Sen. Kennedy, from all of us!

AN OPEN LETTER TO ASU PRESIDENT CROW

2009-04-12T15:09:00.001-05:00

Dear Sir:

I wanted to take a moment of your time to question the reasons for your refusal to grant an honorary degree to Pres. Obama.

While I realize that he has many achievements to come, I also think that his current achievements far outstrip those of past honorees. After all, you have bestowed degrees upon the Canadian Prime Minister, the President of the Navajo Nation and noted humorist Erma Bombeck.

Regardless of the intent, you have caused a great deal of suspicion in the rest of the country. We see this as either racist or sour grapes. Most think it has little to do with the qualifications of the President. Please keep in mind that to many Americans who have never visited Arizona it is best known for the Grand Canyon and as the state that wouldn't celebrate Martin Luther King Day. As a visitor who loves your state, I know it not to be true. But that's based on my personal experiences and not what I have read in the news.

While I personally do not think that race played a part in your decision....others will! And the fact that you did not realize this before you announced your decision is troubling. It makes you, personally; appear to be amazingly blind to public relations. (Which one would think would be an important aspect of your job.)

Perhaps if the accomplishments of the President of the United States are not enough to bestow a degree upon him, you should have selected a different, more qualified speaker.

Regardless of your reasons, you should have realized that this will be a publicity nightmare for the University which you serve and the state in which you live. There will be very good candidates for your school who will choose other schools to attend. There will be vacationers who may prefer visiting somewhere other than the Fairmont Scottsdale this year. I will be curious to see if this alters fund raising figures for your school. I doubt the loss will be significant, but it seems foolhardy in these trying economic times to drive away any business. And your university's seemingly partisan decision must take responsibility for those losses.

All in all, this was a poorly thought out decision on the part of the committee declining to honor the President of the United States. Or it was shortsighted on the part of the committee who selected your commencement speaker. Or it reflected an incredible amount of burecratic incompetence on the part of your staff. Either way it reflects poorly upon you personally, your university and the state of Arizona.

I find it sad that you have chosen a path that leaves you open to charges of racism and political partisanship. On the up side....your graduating students will receive a memorable experience from an eloquent speaker whose' inexperience has led him to the White House in a landslide over one of your state's favorite sons. And since I have heard Sen. McCain speak, I can only say that your students are the real winners here.

THE DOG PEED?

2009-04-06T02:24:00.006-05:00

Pittsburg police officers Stephen Mayhle, Paul Sciullo and Eric Kelly are heros. They died in the line of duty responding to a domestic disturbance as they attempted entry of the residence. Officers Timothy McManaway and Brian Jones were injured in the same incident. They were ambushed by Richard Poplaski, 22, who fired on them with an AK-47 while wearing body armor.

The sacrifice of these officers must be remembered by all Americans. Our thoughts and prayers go out to their families. Their death is a waste.

This and the New York shooting this weekend will create even more calls for gun control from the left. It will then increase the rhetoric of the right as they respond. A seemingly never ending cycle with no winners for America.

I grew up with guns in the house. I enjoy shooting and have no argument with the rights of Americans to own guns. I do however believe that both sides of this issue need to step back and think about what they hope to accomplish in the end. It is true that if you outlaw guns....the outlaws will still have guns. There are too many guns out there to make them vanish because we wish it to be so.

But with the right to own guns comes with the responsibility of ownership. As a child I was taught gun safety. Rarely do I see the same rigid instructions being handed down from parents to children anymore. Those on the Right who insist that gun ownership is a right need to be willing to look at the issue from a standpoint of civic responsibility.

You have the right to free speech...you can't cry fire in a crowded theatre. You have the right to own guns....but you question the lack of restrictions when a gunman walks into your child's school with an automatic rifle.

The hunter needs to respect the fears of the urban homeowner who worries a stray bullet may come through the walls and injure his child. The liberal needs to understand that guns and the culture of hunting are not evil in and of themselves.

Do we grant conceal-and-carry everywhere in hopes of stopping the next school shooting or are we hindering the operation of law enforcement who automatically considers a civilian with a gun to be a threat? (Is that man with a gun a teacher protecting his/her students or a killer?) If you hesitate in your evaluation...you may die. If you shoot too fast...you kill an innocent person.

Are automatic weapons and armor piercing ammo equally protected by the Constitution? Do we place police officers at an unfair advantage when these items are readily available? Who explains to the officer's child why Daddy's vest didn't work?

These are questions that must be examined before we say yea or nay on any new legislation regarding guns. Knee jerk reactions and heated rhetoric will not move us forward. In fact, the heated rhetoric will only lead to more senseless deaths. Words matter and when we try to inflame others with our words we must accept the outcomes we help create.

How do I know this? It's already happened. The three officers killed in Pittsburg were killed by a gunman who according to friends lived in fear of the government coming to take his guns. He had heard too much about Obama banning guns from the internet and talk radio not to believe it. He made statements to several friends, that when the police came to take his guns away he would excercise his constitutional rights and defend himself. HE DID.

Perhaps the saddest and most ironic part of this miserable story is that the cause of the original domestic disturbance was the dog. Apparently the shooter's mother had called the police to have her son thrown out of the house because his dog had peed on the carpet. And for that...three officers died!

APRIL FOOL'S FROM THE GOP

2009-04-02T12:47:00.002-05:00

Yesterday the House GOP celebrated April Fool's Day by releasing their alternative budget for the second time. (The first time had no numbers so it was not very well received.) This time they even included a few numbers to talk about. It sounded pretty good. They promise to reduce taxes, freeze spending, reform entitlements, stop stimulus spending and live happily ever after with less of a deficit than under the Obama budget. Sounds great. So do most April Fool's Day jokes at the beginning. Otherwise, no one would fall for them. But if you really look at what the GOP is saying, you realize that's what this budget is....A BIG APRIL FOOL'S DAY JOKE!

APRIL FOOL'S JOKE 1: The spending freeze proposed is for five years. It does not allow for increases in population, need or disaster. So it's probably a good idea as long as nobody has any babies and boomers postpone retirement for five years. The GOP declined to explain exactly what this would mean in terms of future cuts to programs or the impact on ordinary Americans other than to say that they would be called "Draconian". They do say that the devil is in the details.

APRIL FOOL'S JOKE 2: The GOP offers a flat tax rate of 10% to people making under 50,000 per year and a 25% rate for those making over $100,000 per year. Currently under the Bush tax rate, those making over $100,000 per year pay 35%, so they get a 10% tax cut. Sounds really great unless your single person income is between $50-$100,000 per year. You get left out. This also cuts about $300 Billion dollars per year from government revenues.

APRIL FOOL'S JOKE 3: The GOP plan makes the Bush tax cuts permanent. Which is odd since they have a different rate set up for a flat tax. The setup is that you get to choose which rate you want to pay at. Old Bush tax cuts versus new flat tax rate. Once again, sounds good! The joke is that the deficit projected by the GOP is based on the premise that all tax revenues paid will be at the higher Bush tax rate. So unless you believe that all Americans making over $100,000 will want to pay 10% more in taxes than they have to....add $300 Billion dollars per year to the GOP approved deficit.

APRIL FOOL'S JOKE 4: Medicaid and Medicare will be overseen by private insurance. All I can say is....remember AIG. Do you really want people like that in charge of your healthcare safety net?

APRIL FOOL'S JOKE 5: The GOP budget doesn't include things like disasters and war. One of the reasons that the Obama budget is so high is that he included advance funding for natural disasters each year and the costs of the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan. While the GOP budget increase the Pentagon's budget, the war is a separate line item expense. That's why each year the Bush administration had to ask for additional war funding. It was never planned for. The Obama budget assumes their will be natural disasters and a continuing war effort and includes funding for these items. The GOP prays for good weather and the belief that Americans would never cut off money to the troops. But add these costs onto the GOP deficit projections.

The GOP knows that this budget has no chance in a Democratic congress, so it was written to play to their base and show how different they are from Democrats. It didn't have to be workable or good for the country. It just had to sound good enough to sell the joke. What they showed us was how foolish they think Americans are. Thanks for the laughs!

NEW DAY FOR THE DOJ?

2009-04-01T12:13:00.000-05:00

I've had a lot of issues with the Department of Justice over the last few years. I have disagreed with their handling of many issues. Under Alberto Gonzales, the department began to use social/political criteria when hiring staff. This led to a lot of people who all had similar ideologies but sometimes were a little short on competence. The trial of Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens is a perfect example of what happens when the DOJ is more concerned about your "liberal leanings" than the quality of your legal briefs.

Last year, Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) was convicted of seven counts of lying on a Senate disclosure form regarding gifts. There are very strict limits on the value of gifts that can be offered to government representatives and their staff. (Recently Presidential Spokesman Gibbs returned several radios to members of the press who had been told he had no radio in his office. The reason they were returned is because he is limited to accepting gifts with a value of under $20!) Sen. Stevens accepted over $250,000.00 in gifts & home repairs from an Alaskan oilman.

His conviction has been under considerable scrutiny due to "prosecutorial misconduct". No one (other than Sen. Stevens and his attorneys) has questioned his guilt. But many, including the presiding judge, have commented on the many prosecutorial missteps that occured during the trial. These problems were so severe that the judge held the government prosecutors in contempt. The Bush DOJ had to replace the entire team in the middle of the trial. After the conviction, defense attorneys immediately filed an appeal based not on his innocence but on prosecutorial procedural issues. (If Stevens had raped a woman, this would be the equivilent of his being released because the police didn't get the proper warrent to obtain DNA. It's an outrage when that happens....and it's an outrage that Stevens gets a pass because the prosecution didn't dot thier i's and cross thier t's. BUT IT IS WHAT THE LAW REQUIRES.)

Today, Attorney General Holder has dropped all charges. He based his decision on three factors: 1) Prosecutorial missteps 2) The age of the defendent (84) 3) And the fact that Ted Stevens is no longer serving in the Senate where he could repeat his crimes. Liberals will be offended by this decision, but to me it looks like the first steps toward re-making the DOJ into a non-political part of the government!

REP. ROY BLUNT TAKES TARP MONEY

2009-03-29T01:59:00.005-05:00

Rep. Roy Blunt is currently the best bet the Republican Party has to hold onto retiring Sen. Kit Bond’s seat. And if his current voting record is any indication….this is a sad moment for Missouri Republicans. Rep. Blunt is a rather remarkable example of a WAFFLER!

Back in 2008, Rep. Blunt voted for the $700 billion dollar Wall Street bailout. Rep. Blunt was fixing the credit system at that time. Then two months later in 2009, he voted against the stimulus bill along with the rest of his party. This time he was a shining example of standing up against wasteful government spending. This fiscal conservative (who abhors taxation) also voted to tax any bonus given by a company receiving TARP funds at a rate of 90%. He was showing his indignation at taxpayer money being used to pay bonuses for failed performances.

What he probably doesn’t want you to know is that he received $1500 from a U. S. Bancorp PAC in February. U.S. Bancorp has also received TARP funding. So the question that we as voters need to ask is this: How is it morally defensible to tax bonuses at 90% (because the money was paid for by taxpayers) when you take $1500 from a bailed out company for your upcoming campaign?

Now this is wrong! And all politicians and both political parties should either return contributions from bailed out firms or make an equal donation to charity. Politicians from both parties have received contributions from these companies but Rep. Blunt is the only Missouri politician to do so.

Please feel free to call Rep. Blunts’ office at (202) 225-6536 to tell him that you don’t approve of him accepting money from TARP recipients in the future. Ask him to donate the $1500 he received in February to the American Red Cross for flood relief victims. And then think about your next vote for US Senator.

OOOOPS!

2009-03-23T12:44:00.005-05:00

"It [the stimulus bill] includes ....$140 million for something called 'volcano monitoring....Instead of monitoring volcanoes, what Congress should be monitoring is the eruption of spending in Washington, D.C."

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, February 24, 2009 in the Republican Response to the Presidential Address

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Alaska's Mount Redoubt volcano erupted five times overnight, sending an ash plume more than 9 miles into the air in the volcano's first emissions in nearly 20 years.

Ash from Alaska's volcanos is like a rock fragment with jagged edges and has been used as an industrial abrasive. It can injure skin, eyes and breathing passages. The young, the elderly and people with respiratory problems are especially susceptible to ash-related health problems. Ash can also cause damage engines in planes, cars and other vehicles.

Alaska Airlines on Monday canceled 19 flights in and out of the Anchorage international airport because of the ash."

AP reports, March 23, 2009

We as Americans have to understand that not ALL government spending is either wasteful or bad. What is "pork" in one man's district can save lives in another! (I wonder if Sarah Palin approves of spending tax dollars on Hurricane Monitoring?)

AIG: SPILT MILK

2009-03-18T02:40:00.005-05:00

We’ve all been taught that old adage about “crying over spilt milk”. Now when your kid spills milk on the carpet you really don’t have an option about whether you clean it up or not. You’ve got to! And you can’t spend three days deciding whether it’s better to mop up the mess with a paper towel or terrycloth bath towel. The important thing is to get that spill cleaned up as quickly as possible, by any means available before it does lasting damage. And no matter how great a job you do at cleanup, it’s going to leave stains and there’s going to be a sour milk smell for a long time to come. That’s what AIG really is… a great big, expensive mess of spilt milk!

There has been a lot of angry commentary on the bailout and bonuses of AIG. The general consensus is that Pitchforks and boiling oil are none too good for the executives receiving outrageous bonuses for losing company money! Congress is screaming for blood. But most legal experts agree: a poorly written contract that gives more to the employee than the employer is still a binding contract. Blame the idiots who wrote the contract for AIG a year and a half ago. (You might also have the Dept. of Justice check out whether any criminal actions of fraud were involved on the part of those same dumb AIG officials! Just in case.) But bottom line is that those contracts are legally binding no matter how much they smell. The real irony would be if we spent more on legal fees fighting the payment than the payment actually amounted to.

Many are advocating that we let AIG fail. But as we saw with Lehman Brothers, letting a major “too big to fail” company go under, sends massive shock waves through the financial community. And since AIG is THE largest insurer in the world, we would be looking at an unprecedented financial disaster. Why? Because AIG insures 81 million people with life insurance world wide for a grand total of over 1.9 trillion dollars. AIG also insures businesses against loss, movies against injuries to stars, gulf oil platforms against hurricane damage. If it becomes apparent that the parent company is going under, then a “run” on the policies could start. If all 81 million people decided to cash out their policies at once, it would get very expensive! Financial institutions all over the world would be scrambling to find the cash. This would necessitate selling off bonds which would then freeze up the bond markets. Credit markets would follow soon after. Think of it as Financial Armageddon on a global scale! We may not like this scenario, but since we as a nation decided in the 90’s that financial institutions could “self-regulate” and did nothing to stop the growth of AIG…we must live with the milk we spilt! At least until we have time to disassemble the AIG monster carefully without harming the markets.

So we have to clean up the mess. That requires that we understand exactly how we got into this mess to begin with. Many on the left will try to blame Bush for this, but the truth is that the real start of the problem traces back to Alan Greenspan and Bill Clinton in 2000.

That’s when President Clinton signed an Omnibus Spending Bill to keep the government running at the end of the fiscal year. That Bill contained the COMMODITIES FUTURES MODERNIZATION ACT OF 2000. This new law de-regulated trading of energy futures and insurance policies. (This same act was also responsible for the ENRON fiasco.)

What this Act did for AIG was to allow them to sell a type of insurance policy known as “credit default swaps”. Much like a fire insurance policy on your house, this let an investor purchase policies to insure bonds against loan defaults. Unlike your home policy, this type of bond insurance was left completely unregulated. Investors could purchase insurance on bonds they didn’t even own. This meant that companies like AIG would write credit insurance many times over on the same bond. Many of these bonds were tied to home mortgages. When the housing market went belly up, AIG was in the position of paying out on these bonds. ALL OF THEM! It’s a little like an insurance company having to pay me and ten other investors because YOUR home burned down. These multiple, unregulated transactions broke the financial back of AIG.

It should be noted that the sponsors for this legislation were: “Rep. Thomas W. Ewing (R-IL) and cosponsored by Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R-VA) Rep. Larry Combest (R-TX) Rep. John J. LaFalce (D-NY) Rep. Jim Leach (R-IA) and never debated in the House.[2]

The companion bill (S.3283) was introduced in the Senate on December 15, 2000 (The last day before Christmas holiday) by Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN) and cosponsored by Sen. Peter Fitzgerald (R-IL) Sen. Phil Gramm (R-TX) Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) Sen. Thomas Harkin (D-IA) Sen. Tim Johnson (D-SD) and never debated in the Senate.” (You should note that this Act is an excellent example of the type of deregulatory advice advocated by John McCain’s chief economic advisor, former Sen. Phil Gramm.)

So now that we have the milk spilt all over the floor and are spending huge amounts of money to save AIG, we must determine how to keep this from happening again. The bonuses paid out are annoying, unpatriotic and detestable on many levels; but it’s still milk already spilt. Our focus must be on how to keep this from happening again.

Obviously, we must relearn the mantra of the past, “A business too big to fail is too big”! You really have no right to complain about the mess on the carpet if you give an unsupervised child a gallon of milk to drink from the bottle. You give the child a sippee cup and you watch him with it so he doesn’t destroy the carpet. In a similar manner, the government must be given and must use an oversight authority to keep corporations small enough not to create a systemic risk to our overall economy if they fail. That means Congress needs to start writing new regulations immediately.

This re-regulation has always been a campaign promise of President Obama but timing was not on his side. Two months into an administration is barely enough time to learn your way around the White House, to say nothing of fixing decades of de-regulation. Current proposals include increasing the Federal Reserve’s oversight to include commercial banks, security companies and insurance companies (which are generally regulated by the states). Hedge Funds and securities companies will face stricter disclosure requirements.

Recently, President Obama stated: ““

We now know from painful experience that we can no longer sustain 21st-century markets with 20th-century regulations….Strong financial markets require clear rules of the road, not to hinder financial institutions but to protect consumers and investors and, ultimately, to keep those financial institutions strong.”

Let us hope that our political leaders keep focused on the most important aspect of the AIG mess….fixing it so it never happens again!

SIN TAXES AND PROP BETS

2009-03-14T13:23:00.007-05:00

"SIN TAXES" are in for legislators this year! In these times of ballooning deficits, lawmakers are looking at legalizing a variety of activities such as pot and Internet gambling for the expressed purpose of taxing the activities to increase revenue. It's an interesting idea. The truth is that these activities are easily found all over the country. Prohibition hasn't seemed to limit the availability of any of the them. Many people are upset that billions of dollars are spent on these items and none of it comes back to the government as tax revenue.

Recently this discussion came up at a poker table I was sitting at. The start of the conversation was not these specific activities but instead the age-old question of: Do taxes hurt business or do they actually help grow the economy?

The Right will tell you that tax increases diminish the desire of Americans to make a profit because it's "all going to the government." ANY new tax on business will hurt the economy in a recession and will probably drive the business into immediate failure!

The Left counters by pointing out that taxes were higher under Clinton and the economy prospered. Raising taxes lets the government build infrastructure and fund education, all of which increase the ability of the country to make money.

It's a hard argument to either prove of disprove. Finally it was suggested that perhaps we should try an experiment. What a poker player calls a "prop" bet. Prop bets are based on a particular proposition. "I'll bet you $5 that I can eat 25 hotdogs in 10 minutes" is an example of a prop bet. If I'm right and I can eat the hotdogs in the time limit, I win $5. If I'm wrong about my proposition, you win $5.

Prop bets could be applied to economic policy. The Right says taxes kill business and also disapprove of activities such as gambling, porn and drugs. Here's a somewhat tounge-in-cheek proposition that would allow Conservative America to put your money where your mouth is. Legalize these three activities as a test case, tax them heavily and if the Conservative Right is correct; the country should see a huge decline in porn traffic, marijuana usage and internet gambling.

Just think, you'll be able to go to church some Sunday morning and exclaim, "The strip club down the street is closing because of the new taxes!" "The McSmitty Brothers have stopped smoking pot because the sales tax is too high!" It could be a whole new world and you will have the added satisfaction of knowing that your ideas on the dangers of taxation were correct.

On the other hand, if (and I know this is a long shot) taxation doesn't hurt business, then we have a LOT of "Sin Tax" revenues coming in at a time we need to raise all the money we can!

We laughed at this (both conservative and liberal players) for the rest of the night. Then today just for grins I thought I would see if I could determine just how much money this could raise. (Asking people to guess the amount might make a great prop bet for the next game.)

The results were rather astounding.

If marijuana were legalized then it is estimated that $7.7 Billion dollars would be saved by eliminating enforcement, incarceration and prosecution of marijuana crimes. If you taxed the drug at the same rate as cigarettes & alcohol (other Sin Tax items) you would raise $6.2 Billion dollars in revenue for a combined total of revenue and savings of $13.9 Billion dollars

Estimates for the revenue from taxing on-line poker sites is $5.2 Billion dollars.

And an 18% tax on the porn industry would raise $2.4 Billion dollars.

So the final terms of this Economic "Prop Bet" between the Conservative Right and the Liberal Left would make it the largest prop bet of all time! Conservatives would be betting the demise of these unappealing industries against projected revenues of $21.5 Billion dollars in taxes to prove the point: Taxation kills business and hurts the economy.

Seems like this would be a win/win for the country. We're not taxing any business that the Right wouldn't like to see killed anyway. And it could save a lot of time in Congress. There's a lot of arguing over whether taxes help or hurt. This "bet" could end the partisan philisophical arguing and let them get on to something more important...like pragmatic governing!

PORK AND THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER

2009-03-09T00:04:00.004-05:00

There has been a lot of talk lately concerning "earmarks" and Congress. "Pork Barrel Spending" is what many Republicans refer to it as! Yet in conversation, most people really aren't very sure of the exact definition of the term "earmark".

For the record, "earmark" refers to money appropriated by a single member of Congress and directed to a specific destination by that member. Often it will benefit a contributor to that politician in some way. For years, the member of Congress did not even have to publicly acknowledge that he/she had requested the money. It was a very secretive process that was very useful in earning good will with high dollar contributors.

That secrecy is what led to our current distaste with the process. Because while the process HAS been abused (frequently by both sides of the political aisle) the truth is that many of those earmarks provide much needed help to state and local governments.

You see "pork" is often in the eye of the beholder. Let's look at a recent example raised by Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal. In his response to President Obama's recent speech, he labeled as wasteful, money "earmarked" for volcano monitoring.

"Instead of monitoring volcanoes, what Congress should be monitoring is the eruption of spending in Washington,"

Jindal said. It sounds kind of silly. VOLCANO MONITORING! Sort of a geophysical hall monitor funded by wasteful politicians.

But if you live in any of the states that currently have active volcanoes (Washington, Alaska, Hawaii, California and anyone close to Yellowstone National Park) you might think this extra $140 million dollars is money well spent....no matter how it got in the budget! Some have suggested that if the money to monitor volcanoes is cut that we should cut an equal amount from the National Weather Service's Hurricane Prediction budget.

Gov. Jindal didn't complain about one of the wasteful earmarks mentioned recently by Sen. John McCain. Sen. McCain wants to know why $6.6 million dollars has been appropriated for termite research in New Orleans! During these trying economic times, why spend that much money on studying bugs? Gov. Jindal's silence speaks volumes. You see, there are few termites in Arizona, but it is widely speculated that termites in New Orleans contributed to the failure of the levees. So Gov. Jindal for some odd reason doesn't see this as wasteful. Pork is always in the eye of the beholder.

The real problem with earmarks is not necessarily the money...it's the accountability. In the past, there was no way to track what had been added and who it had been added by. And that's all changed now. Democrats have instituted a rule that requires all appropriation earmarks to be made public. This doesn't mean that there will be no future abuse. It doesn't mean that the process does not still need more modification. But we need to remember that all earmarks are not bad. Getting rid of ALL earmarks is a little like throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

MONKEYS, WATERMELONS & FREEDOM OF SPEECH

2009-02-26T22:08:00.006-06:00

A recent front page cartoon published by the New York Post has much of the liberal world screaming for blood! The cartoon in question showed two police officers who had just shot and killed a monkey. One officer says, "They'll have to get someone else to write the next stimulus bill".

Liberals immediately screamed "racism" and the Post insisted it had nothing to do with Obama. Protests began outside the offices of the Post, eventually they issued a rather wishy-washy apology which only increased the intensity of the protests. Finally a new apology came direct from the top.

In another case, the mayor of a small California town, sent an e-mail with a picture showing the White House lawn filled with watermelons. The caption read, "No Easter Egg Hunt this year". A very predictable uproar began and the mayor has promised to resign because he believes the act has "compromised" his ability to lead effectively.

In both cases, the Right has called the reaction to these images an infringement on Freedom of Speech. "This is America and as Americans we have the right to express ourselves without constraint."

Whether these images are intentionally racist is debateable. The fact that they are perceived as racist by a large segment of the population is not! It is generally considered impolite to intentionally offend people with your speech...but it is still your right to do so. Polite people also hope that if you unintentionally offend people, you can learn from your mistake and not make the same mistake again. But there will always be those people who just don't care.

Rupert Murdoch (Owner of both Fox News & the New York Post) wrote,

"As the Chairman of the New York Post, I am ultimately responsible for what is printed in its pages. The buck stops with me.

Last week, we made a mistake. We ran a cartoon that offended many people. Today I want to personally apologize to any reader who felt offended, and even insulted.

Over the past couple of days, I have spoken to a number of people and I now better understand the hurt this cartoon has caused. At the same time, I have had conversations with Post editors about the situation and I can assure you - without a doubt - that the only intent of that cartoon was to mock a badly written piece of legislation. It was not meant to be racist, but unfortunately, it was interpreted by many as such.

We all hold the readers of the New York Post in high regard and I promise you that we will seek to be more attuned to the sensitivities of our community."

The apology from the owner of the Post was unexpected. His analysis of problem was also extremely insightful. Even if you buy the fact that the slur was unintentional (which I don't), the images evoked for many an extremely upsetting storyline. It not only reminded us of the past when the monkey was a symbol for African Americans but it also seemed to suggest assasination of the President.

The cartoons, whether racist or not, are covered under Free Speech. But those on the right need to understand that Freedom of Speech is a two-edged sword. If Al Sharpton doesn't like what he reads in the Post, he too is free to exercise his option of speaking out against what he reads. If he wants to boycott the Post, he is free to do so and to convince as many people as he can to also exercise thier right to free speech.

That's what FREE SPEECH means! That's what makes America so great to live in!

FACES OF ENTITLEMENT

2009-02-20T02:00:00.004-06:00

It is a sad reality that we rarely see the face of the average “entitlement” recipient. The media loves to show us the extreme example. After we become bored with the novelty of octuplets, media spends endless hours discussing the cost to the public of octuplets. Two million in medical costs, Mom takes out student loans to live on, food stamps and a home in foreclosure. Nadya Suleman: POSTER CHILD FOR THE EVILS OF ENTITLEMENT! These are your tax dollars at work. Redistribution of wealth at it’s finest.

Yesterday, I saw another side of “entitlements”. I stood in line at the grocery store muttering to myself about how slow the person ahead of me was. He had a case of soup-in-a-cup and the checker was ringing each cup up individually. It was taking forever and I was in a hurry! Then I listened to the conversation he was having with the checker and I realized why. It was the middle of the month and the man only had so much left in food stamps for the month. He worked nights and was raising his kids as a single parent. The soup was an easy and affordable meal that he didn’t need to be home to prepare. He bought as many as he could afford. The rest of his cart contained fresh vegetables, rice, milk and fruit rollups for the kids. No junk food, no soda, none of the items we are told by talk radio that welfare recipients waste OUR tax dollars on. Instead I saw a father working hard to make ends meet during bad economic times.

As a society, we don’t find any gratification in looking at the millions of Americans who survive because they accept food stamps, Medicare or Section 8 Housing. We show no interest in the numbers of people who have left the welfare system because the system worked for them. They accept help during a bad time and then use that help to get back on their feet. But they’re not interesting! Spend time talking about them and watch your news ratings drop.

There are a lot more people like that man on welfare today than there are Nadya Sulemans. They are good people with something to contribute to our society. Many of them will leave the rolls of welfare eventually. Some of these former entitlement recipients may be your friends. I know a woman who in the 70’s was an unmarried mother of two, who took food stamps, Section 8 housing and student loans. Thirty years later she has a degree and is part owner of a small business. Without government assistance she would never be where she is today. She (and all those like her) are the justification for why entitlements are necessary.

So the next time you want to complain about all those worthless people sucking up tax dollars, keep in mind that all you hear about are the losers. Often the system works and that too deserves recognition.

WE ARE THE ONES

2009-01-19T00:48:00.001-06:00

Monday, January 19th is Martin Luther King Day. It was conceived as a day of public service to honor the memory of Dr. King. It is a day that we as Americans have been asked to find some way to contribute to our community. And all across the country people will take time out of their day to do "something". Hopefully you will be among them. It doesn't have to be much. Simply baking cookies for your local fire station or picking up other people's trash along the side of the road. Maybe you'll grab an extra bag of flour to drop off at a homeless shelter or church food pantry. But what ever you do, take time to reflect upon the possibilities of the future.

For years we have complained that the "younger generation" doesn't care. They are the product of broken homes, disfunctional schools and an economy that offers little hope of success to the graduate of a public school. We complain that pop culture belittles the importance of education. Video games and entertainment glorify crime and violence. We have called our children a "lost generation" with good reason. Because they were and still are.

Liberals say all we have to do is put money into education to fix the problem. Conservatives tell us that it's the fault of kids with no drive to succeed. And both sides are right. Without the support of families and a quality education, the chance of a child succeeding is slim. Without a drive to succeed and a belief that success is a possibility, the child has NO chance of succeeding. Government can fix the schools, provide housing, food and medical care for the child....but it cannot convince a child that success is more than just a dream. It takes people to do that.

But today we stand a chance to make a difference. All across this country there are children who have watched the election of Barack Obama and now BELIEVE that anything really is possible. You don't have to play ball like Micheal Jordan or play guitar like Slash to succeed. Dreams have grown into possibilities.

On election night, I watched the results at a party. One of the guests was a young man who is from a single parent home. He had worked for the Obama campaign after school. I watched the look in his eye when it was announced that Obama had won. And after Obama had spoke that evening, I caught him alone in another room standing in front of a mirror giving his own "acceptance speech". His view of the world and it's possibilities changed that night. You watch the news and see countless examples of children inspired by an Obama presidency. And this inspiration has given us as adults the chance to reclaim at least part of a lost generation.

But thier inspiration will be shortlived and of little use if we do not try to nurture it. Don't get me wrong. We won't save them all. But the ones we do are worth the effort. Much like fishermen, Americans tend to fall into two categories: Those that focus on the "many that got away" and those that focus on "the catch we landed". It's fun to complain about the ones that got away but practical people who focus on catching fish...get to eat.

And so this year on Martin Luther King Day, take time to reflect on what YOU can do throughout the year to change a generation ripe for that change. Join a mentoring program or Big Brothers/Big Sisters. Get involved in your church's youth group. Do something weird like joining the PTA. Because for the first time in years, our children are open to our help. Some of them believe in new possibilities for thier lives. We need to be there for them. It's not a question of liberal or conservative, Christian or Athiest, Black or white. It's about our future, their future and the future of our nation.

"We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek. We are the hope of those boys who have little; who've been told that they cannot have what they dream; that they cannot be what they imagine. Yes they can."

Barack Obama, Super Tuesday, February 5, 2008

THE IDEALOGUE VS. THE PRAGMATIC

2008-11-01T23:55:00.000-05:00

As we come down to the final days of the 2008 election cycle, perhaps we should make a close examation of why we choose to vote the way we do. Our country has managed to divide itself fairly equally between two different and vastly opposing ideologies. And as tends to be the case with extreme idealogues...the more committed they are, the more vocal and uncompromising they are. And this is NOT a good thing. No ideology whether liberal or conservative fits all situations all of the time. The result is a blind committment to what may be a good idea in theory but simply doesn't work in a pragmatic way.

The idealogue will follow the party line all the way....regardless of where it leads. The gay rights idealogue will insist that gay marriage is a right...and nothing less than legal marriage is acceptable. He will continue to insist on his right, even turning down the compromise of "domestic partnership". That means that when his partner lies near death in a hospital, that partner can be kept from the hospital bed by the partner's parents. The pragmatist says, "what's in a name"? Domestic partnership would give you the rights you deserve without incurring the anger and conflict that the term marriage will bring to the discussion.

The idealogue will insist that "gun ownership" should have NO limitations and that any law curtailing your right to a weapon is unconstitutional and must be fought! The pragmatist asks, "what happens when a 14 year old boy walks into your daughter's middle school with an automatic weapon and an attitude?"

The idealogue believes in "my way or the highway" while the pragmatist looks for the compromise solution.

One of the greatest complaints I hear about our government is the assertion that they don't get anything done. But that's to be expected. We vote our ideology. And as a nation we are pretty evenly split down the middle between conservative and liberal. We have reached a national road block with neither conservatives or liberals being enough of a majority to make any progress on real solutions to real problems. And that is why I am supporting Sen. Obama for President.

Two years ago I read both of the Senator's books and was especially impressed with THE AUDACITY OF HOPE. In it he discusses his political philosophy which is very dependent upon the belief that policy only works with a majority concensus. He wrote of two incidents that stuck in my mind that illustrate how a President Obama would approach policy. Both anecdotes involved "hot button" issues designed to upset both the right & the left. But the Senator's take on the Death Penalty and Separation of Church & State was what first led me to think that a President Obama might be a good idea.

While an Illinois State Senator, Obama worked on a bill concerning the death penalty. On a personal level, Senator Obama is against the death penalty in most cases. A liberal group had brought up the issue of Chicago cops who would allegedly beat a confession from a suspect and then have him charged with a death penalty crime based on that coerced confession. The liberal idealogue would insist on trying to ban the death penalty. Obama instead stated the obvious, most Americans support to one degree or another the death penalty. He sat down with representatives of the police and with those advocating the end of the death penalty. He then passed legislation that limited death penalty convictions to cases where the confession is video taped. If a confession was given without the videotape, then the man would only be sentenced to life imprisonment. He found a solution based on the limited common ground of the two sides. Neither was completely happy with it but both sides agreed that it worked better than the status quo.

He also addressed the issue of separation of church & state. As he put it, you can't let the government endorse a particular religion or religious belief. But the flip side is that those who watch that "line in the sand" need to be aware that the world does not stop is someone mentions "God" in public. There needs to be a balance that reflects the differing opinions of the public.

One of Obama's favorite sayings is, "I know you want to go to the moon, but we only have enough gas to get this far". He is pragmatic about what can and cannot be done. I would be willing to bet that all of the screams of outrage against his candidacy from the right will be nothing compared to the screams from the left when they realize that he listens to both sides before acting.

I would prefer to vote for the candidate who is going to realize that America is made up of many differing opinions. I will vote for the candidate who considers the middle ground when enacting policy. To be honest, I think McCain has many pragmatic traits about him. It was one of the things that attracted me to his candidacy in 2000, but he is definitely an idealogue on foreign policy. More importantly, he is an old man and his number two is an unprepared idealogue. And that a recipe for disaster!

DID YOU CONTRIBUTE TO THE PALIN WARDROBE FUND?

2008-10-27T23:20:00.002-05:00

Just a quick question for donors to the Republican Party. It's been difficult economic times for everyone. Do you mind that the McCain Campaign spent $150,000 on a new wardrobe for Sarah Palin or would you like your money back?

Or as Mike Murphy (McCain's 2000 campaign manager) put it:

WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A PITBULL & A HOCKEY MOM?

YOU CAN FEED A PITBULL FOR 368 YEARS ON WHAT IT TAKES TO CLOTHE A HOCKEY MOM!

WHY I SUPPORT OBAMA: STEWARDSHIP

2008-10-27T23:07:00.002-05:00

I have many reasons for supporting Sen. Obama's campaign. Some of those reasons are because I support specific policies that he has proposed. Some of the reasons are less distinct. An example of such is my belief that Sen. Obama would show the best stewardship of the country. Stewardship is defined as the act of caring for another's property or interests. It is an often neglected aspect of the job description of President. But ultimately the concept that the President is responsible for the wise use of the resources of government is one of the most important ideas to the running of good government.

Many people believe that the government should have NO influence over their lives. They have a "survival of the fittest" mentality which denies any need of government influence in thier lives. Other people strongly feel that the government should solve every problem for them. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. We may not want to be taxed: but without those taxes there is no revenue to run the country. Without those revenues bad things happen...bridges fall down, military endeavors fail and economic failings can leave society at a standstill.

So we need government and we need the administration of that government to be wise and responsible. The degree to which we need that government is and always will be an issue of contention among Americans. There are many who believe that Sen. Obama will tax and spend us all into poverty. And that is an issue that has been discussed on many blogs, talk shows and at every bar in the country. The degree to which government needs to be involved is a matter for argument, the need for responsible use of those resources is not.

Simply put, I believe that Sen. Obama will be the better steward of America's resources. You may disagree with how much to give him, but he is the one who will best administer what he is given to work with.

I believe strongly that people fall into two categories as they grow older. Some see the future as a fragile gift to our children and grandchildren. Others believe (regardless of what theology they profess) that when they die....the world for all practical purposes STOPS! I do not profess to know for sure how Sen. McCain sees the future, but I am certain that the father in Sen. Obama looks to the future legacy he leaves his children.

It's much like the Biblical proverb: One servant buried his master's money to make sure that it stayed safe and wasn't lost. He was rebuked for the waste of potential. The wise servant cared for the money as if it were his own. He used it responsibly and produced a profit for his master. He wanted something better for the future...not just to maintain the status quo.

Many have called Obama a socialist or suggested that in "re-distributing the wealth" he would take from the rich to give to the poor. In many cases, this is a thinly veiled assertion that Sen. Obama will "look after his own" and give your hard earned money to those "other black people." The labels & name calling are merely a way to form divisions among us. A way to keep us from examining the real issue: How do we use our resources to our best advantage?

The truth is that Sen. Obama feels ALL Americans are hurting now. And some are doing more than hurting. They make just enough to pay the rent and keep the lights turned on but there is no "extra" to be cut. Under an Obama plan, the ones who make a quarter of a million dollars or more per year will pay more money towards our national upkeep. Why? Because that extra payment will not result in their utilities being turned off. I once listened to a woman ahead of me at the bank who was complaining that the economy was so bad that she couldn't afford to go to Europe for vacation and would have to settle on Mexico this year. I hope you don't mind if I don't get all misty eyed over her loss.

We are a nation at war...on two fronts. We are a nation that has ignored it's infra-structure to the point that it is falling down around us. We are a nation facing a severe recession. We must increase our revenues and we must use those revenues wisely. Never has our nation staged a war paid for by credit and now we must pay the bill. The manner in which that bill is payed is of extreme importance to our future.

All sides, whether they support Obama's bid for presidency or not, have commented on the way his campaign has been run. There have been conservative Republicans who have publicly held the Obama Campaign as a shining example of executive management. The same cannot be said of the McCain campaign. When Obama was asked by the CEO of a Fortune 500 company, "why when you have no executive management experience, should we believe you can run America?" And Obama replied, "Watch how I run my campaign."

So on Nov. 4th, I will look to the future and cast my vote for Sen. Barack Obama. The Senator summed it up best today in a speech:

"We can choose hope over fear, unity over division, the promise of change over the power of the status quo...In one week, we can come together as one nation, and one people, and once more choose our better history. That's what's at stake."

"The change we need isn't just about new programs and policies...It's about a new attitude, it's about new politics _ a politics that calls on our better angels instead of encouraging our worst instincts."

NEW ENDORSEMENT FOR McCAIN

2008-10-22T22:28:00.001-05:00

Sen. John McCain's presidential bid received a new endorsement today. Several bloggers on a web site called al-Hesba have endorsed Sen. McCain as the best choice for an American President to promote their agenda. Normally, the McCain campaign would be thrilled at a new endorsement....but this web site is a password protected site sponsored by Al-Qaeda!

They feel that a President McCain will continue to occupy American military resources in Iraq and that his "impetuous" character will lead him to make decisions that will increase the Anti-American sentiment that feeds Al Qaeda funding and recruitment.

It's very easy to make light of this "endorsement". Many on the left are having a field day with it. Look to see it as the "joke of the week" on any number of late night shows. But it alludes to an extremely serious issue that many would like to ignore. We still live in dangerous times! One of the many pro-McCain quotes also suggests that an attack before the election could swing the vote enough to allow McCain to win.

"If al-Qaida carries out a big operation against American interests," the message said, "this act will be support of McCain because it will push the Americans deliberately to vote for McCain so that he takes revenge for them against al-Qaida. Al-Qaida then will succeed in exhausting America till its last year in it."

As a liberal, I am often accused of being blind to the dangers of the world we live in. That is simply not correct. Al-Qaida IS still a danger. But it is important to consider how the next President will react in a moment of crisis. Conventional wisdom suggests that the ex-military pilot would have a better grasp of what is necessary to combat the enemy. Unfortunately, all we have seen from Sen. McCain are knee-jerk reactions to events as opposed to a clear, concise response to a situation. (Look at the economic crisis.) When you examine the irratic manner in which he has managed his own campaign, it calls into question his judgment in managing a military operation. We should also keep in mind that our actions in Iraq have been one of the best recruitment tools Al-Qaeda has ever had.

You see, it is not enough for a President to only understand the military aspects of a conflict. He must be equally versed in the political ramifications of his actions. If you blow up a building to kill a terrorist, you will probably also kill civilians. That action may strengthen the resolve of the people to support the terrorists you are trying to defeat. The importance of the target may outweigh the political risk of killing civilians. That is a matter to be judged each time by the President. I have no doubt that McCain can blow up the building. I am no longer sure that he has the wisdom to see the end result of his actions or the political impact they will have on the situation. (Remember, McCain is one of those who insisted that we would be greeted as liberators by the Iraqi people.)

While it has been suggested that an Obama Presidency would be "tested" to see how he would react early in his term, it could also be suggested that the predictability of McCain's temperment is equally dangerous. The first rule of war is to understand your adversary's strengths & weaknesses in order to exploit them. McCain's predictability is very easily exploited.

There is danger in the world today. An "impetuous" president will NOT help us navigate the dangerous waters of the world we find ourselves living in! A new direction is needed!

WHY I SUPPORT OBAMA: THE CONSTITUTION

2008-10-22T00:00:00.003-05:00

When I was in grade school it was required that every student memorize the Preamble to the Constitution. In middle school we were required to read the entire document...test on Monday. We were taught the three branches of government and how they were to be a system of "checks & balances" on each other. And in high school, we discussed the implications of that document in a class called Comparative Political Systems taught by a man who took great pride in his nickname..."BETTER DEAD THAN RED" CHARLIE. This was during the Reagan years and the end of the Cold War, it was a class that left an impression.

"Charlie" is dead now. And as conservative as he was, I can't help but think that he would be horrified to see what has happened to his favorite document during the past 8 years. Because the greatest casualty to 9/11 has been the Constitution! Under the guise of "homeland security", President Bush has used the attack on the Twin Towers to justify the gutting of the most impressive document of government written since the Magna Carta.

It can now be stated of America that under the leadership of President Bush, we have legalized the following acts that are considered by many to be unconstitutional:

* The government can imprison ANY AMERICAN whom the government has determined to be an "enemy of America". There is no need for a warrant.
* Suspension of Habeas Corpus. The right of an individual to petition the court for release from incarceration. This is the right to a trial. You can't simply be held indefinitely without a court appearance.
* While Congress has passed laws during the Bush Administration prohibiting torture, the President has issued a "signing statement" allowing it under his own interpretation of the law but in violation of the Constitution.
* Up until the passing of the most recent FISA Bill, President Bush authorized warrantless domestic wiretapping of American citizens.

The argument offered by the administration to justify these acts consists of the establishment of the never ending War on Terror. Then the President claims the additional powers offered to him by the Constitution in times of war and national emergency. The problem with this is that it has become a very open ended commitment on the part of the President. If the war never ends....you don't have to give up the extra power you wield.

President Bush & Vice President Cheney have long felt that the Executive Branch was stripped of it's power following Watergate. They have used the excuse of 9/11 to take power that Nixon never dreamed of.

Please don't misunderstand, I am aware that we face many dangers in today's world. But I fear anything that disrupts the delicate balance established by our founding fathers between the duty of the Executive Branch to execute the laws and the oversite obligation of the other branches.

These changes can be as dangerous in the long run as the threat of terrorism is in the short term. It sounds good to say that the President won't be bothered with liberal courts and evidence when terrorists stalk our streets to kill us. But in a few years, we could find that the "terrorists" are no longer Muslim but something much closer to home. You see the Patriot Act doesn't discriminate between citizen and non-citizen. So the next time it's used to arrest an "enemy of America" it might be you! And then you have no right to a trial or even to see the evidence presented against you.

This may sound silly, but if you have been called traitor and un-American as often as I have by bloggers, you get a little nervous when a candidate for vice-president starts talking about the "REAL AMERICA". I often argued in 2005 that you should never give President Bush power that you would not want a President Hillary Clinton to have.

I don't mind wiretapping of citizens. I do mind when it is done without a court order. I know I should trust the government to act responsibly, but as we learned last week...it often doesn't. We now know that countless American service men were listened in on while they called home. And instead of catching terrorists, we established a military intelligence 900 number. Military Intelligence was listening to phone sex between soldiers and the partners left at home. Worse, they were passing the BEST calls on to others to enjoy! Please explain to me how this is either making me safer or is protecting my constitutional rights.

Earlier this year, Sen. Obama showed that he understood the tightrope that must be walked between keeping the country safe and protecting the rights of its citizens. When the FISA bill was first presented, he worked to ensure that it required a court order be obtained for any wire tap. FISA was a very hot button issue for the liberal side of the Democratic party. He upset many of them when he voted for the FISA bill because he felt the need for safety outweighed the minor problems of the bill once oversight was established. In this, he showed a clearer understanding of the true intent of the Constitution than our current president has.

As a Constitutional Law professor for one of the best law schools in the US, Senator Obama offers our best hope for restoring the mindset of government to one that believes in the importance of the Constitution. He understands that it is our Constitution that makes America different from the rest of the world. We have seen this recently when the Supreme Court overruled a ban on handguns within a municipality. Sen. Obama disagreed with their ruling, but pointed out that while he didn't like it, once the Supreme Court makes a ruling....that's the law. How nice that he accepted it when he didn't get his way. Refreshing after the last eight years.

The Constitution is the single most important legal document in the history of our country. Sen. Obama is the candidate most inclined to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States of America (and not just the parts that he likes!)

REST IN PEACE

2008-10-20T00:26:00.005-05:00

"Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer is no. That's not America. Is there something wrong with a seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing he or she could be president? Yet I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion that he is a Muslim and might have an association with terrorists. This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

I feel particularly strong about this because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who were serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay, was of a mother at Arlington Cemetery and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone, and it gave his awards - Purple Heart, Bronze Star - showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death, he was 20 years old. And then at the very top of the head stone, it didn't have a Christian cross. It didn't have a Star of David. It has a crescent and star of the Islamic faith.
And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan. And he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was fourteen years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he could serve his country and he gave his life."

Ret. General Colin Powell, MEET THE PRESS, October 19, 2008

Thank you, Sir. For reminding us what it means to be an American. There are over 20,000 Muslim-Americans currently serving in our Armed Forces. We must remember them and their sacrifices with all due honor and respect. May the blessings of God & Allah be upon you.

MUCH ADO ABOUT ACORN

2008-10-19T22:32:00.001-05:00

It's October of an election year. And as predictable as the turning of the autumn leaves, comes the Republican cries about the evils of ACORN and voter fraud. Now don't get me wrong, I am not trying to make light of what could be a serious problem. But listening to the Right will cause you to confuse the crime of Voter Fraud (a major offense) with the lesser crime of voter registration fraud. They are screaming about the potential problems of the oak when all they really have in hand are a few nuts.

ACORN is an organization dedicated to being a political voice for the poor. They are involved in a number of projects that include working on housing issues, rebuilding New Orleans, school lunch menus, etc. The most visible arm of their work is their voter registration drives. Both in 2004 & 2006 there were allegations that ACORN was submitting thousands of fraudulent voter registrations. These allegations have resurfaced this election cycle as well. The Right would have you believe that these registrations are being done in order to alter the results of the election. They will remind you that Sen. Obama once represented ACORN as an attorney and has worked for them repeatedly over the years. They then allege that the Obama campaign is behind this "conspiracy". They point out that the Obama campaign gave 830,000 dollars to ACORN and on an FEC report listed it for "event management" instead of voter registration. (We know this because the Obama campaign amended the report without prompting. If they hadn't we would never know this.)

I have a lot of trouble with "conspiracy theories". For a conspiracy to be big enough to make a difference in the real world, it requires a lot of people's active participation. It also requires them to keep quite about it. (And nobody has ever accused Democrats of being "quiet" or of being able to keep a secret.) What I think has happened instead is an organization with lofty goals being bogged down in the nuts & bolts operation of their agenda. The incompetence of the organization is then used as "evidence" of massive wrongdoing with large leaps of assumption thrown in to smear both the organization and the Democratic candidate. A review of their operations is not out of line, but to condemn them for "fixing" an election is a stretch of the imagination.

It is a fact that ACORN has submitted many fraudulent voter registrations. We know this in part because ACORN flags many of these when they turn them in. But the law requires them to turn in all registrations they take, regardless of ACORN's belief in their authenticity. (If this was not the case, you would be hearing cries that ACORN throws away any registrations they think would vote Republican.) The legal requirement to turn them in is a safe guard to protect both sides.

The next major question is why take fake registrations in the first place if not to alter an election? Well, the fraud is not being perpetrated by the organization on America, but by the workers of ACORN on ACORN itself. ACORN hires out of work people to do the registration. They are trying to give a "hand up" to the poor by giving them a paycheck. In many cases this is a great thing, but some of the people they hire are more interested in getting a paycheck than in helping out. If you are told you must get 25 registrations per day to keep your job, then a few will always decide to take the cards home, look through the phone book and make up the names. This way they can keep their paycheck (without going through the hassle of the work). Eventually they are caught & fired...but the law requires that they submit their registrations regardless.

Now Sen. Obama did as an attorney represent ACORN in Illinois. What the right doesn't want you to know is that his co-council for this was the UNITED STATES JUSTICE DEPARTMENT. And his involvement with them afterwards has been as a guest speaker twice to the Chicago branch as a motivational speaker to a group of about 50. Now if the fact that he still spoke to them twice bothers you, keep in mind that in February 2006, John McCain was the keynote speaker at a major immigration rally in Florida sponsored by (drum roll please) ACORN. It is even more interesting to note that much of the speech was to praise the work of ACORN. Talk about flip-flops!

It is also interesting to note that while voter fraud registration is evident.....THERE HAVE BEEN NO CASES OF TRUE VOTE FRAUD! No trials, no convictions, not much of anything except cries of cheating ALWAYS timed just before the next election. And that brings me to my final observation. Does anyone really believe that if this was a true danger to Democracy, that Republicans would just drop it every year after the election is done? Wouldn't they spend the next two years making sure that they weren't cheated again?

This is nothing more than a distraction. Republicans have controlled the House & Senate for so long that they don't want you to look at issues. They don't want you to think about the economy or Iraq or any of the real problems facing America. They want you to believe that Democrats are stealing the election by registering fictional cartoon characters in a Disneyland vote drive. But until Mickey Mouse shows up at the polls to vote: ACORN's stealing the election is just an urban myth. Much ado about NOTHING!

A PICTURE'S WORTH A 1000 WORDS

2008-10-16T19:37:00.002-05:00

They say that "a picture's worth a thousand words". A thousand words. I've written that many and more over the past year trying to explain to people my support for Sen. Obama. And while there are a lot of reasons I support the Senator, one of the most difficult to explain is his unflappability and why it's important. Whether you like the man or not, many would agree that the man is a very cool and detached individual. That is one of the things that many people dislike about Sen. Obama.

But I prefer a President that is a bit detached. I don't need a "beer buddy", I'm hiring a President. I want someone as President who can sit at a negotiation table (across from both our friends and foes) and who doesn't wear his emotions on his sleeve. I want him to be cool and collected. Giving nothing away.

I don't want a man who appears out of control or angry. Or wandering around lost. I don't think it will do America any good to have another President who sneers or rolls his eyes. Giving everything away with his "tells". In poker, a player like this is called a "fish". And a fish (and his money) are always welcome at any table. I don't want a "fish" for President.

A "detached" poker player doesn't let his emotions rule his play. He maximizes his wins when the cards are good and minimizes his losses when lady luck goes to lunch. When helpful, he bluffs. But the bottom line is that he wants to walk away with all the chips on the table! I want a President that gets "all the chips" for America! To do that, you need to be calm, collected and careful!

I've spent a lot of time and a lot of words trying to explain this to people over the past year. And then today, I saw this photo from last night's debate. It said it all.....without the thousand words!

WHICH MAN DO YOU WANT TO BE SITTING AT THE TABLE?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gadgets/slideshows/443/slide_443_10841_large.jpg

RATS AND THE GOOD SHIP "GOP"

2008-10-15T21:51:00.003-05:00

Each day more and more CONSERVATIVES are speaking out about their doubts concerning the McCain campaign. The liberal media has termed them "rats deserting the ship" and these are their comments!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"[McCain] knows, in his gut, that he put somebody unqualified on the ballot. He knows that in his gut, and when this race is over that is something he will have to live with... He put somebody unqualified on that ballot and he put the country at risk, he knows that."

Matthew Dowd, Chief Strategist for George W. Bush's Re-Election Campaign

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I voted for Bush, father and son, but this time I'll vote for Obama...."I pray God, Barack Obama is elected,"

Dennis Hopper, Movie Star & Long Time Republican currently starring in AN AMERICAN CAROL. (I don't know which is scarier...Dennis Hopper voting Democratic or Dennis Hopper praying?)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear had to feel sorry for the old lion on his last outing and wish that he could be taken somewhere soothing and restful before the night was out. The train-wreck sentences, the whistlings in the pipes, the alarming and bewildered handhold phrases—"My friends"—to get him through the next 10 seconds. I haven't felt such pity for anyone since the late Adm. James Stockdale humiliated himself as Ross Perot's running mate. And I am sorry to have to say it, but Stockdale had also distinguished himself in America's most disastrous and shameful war, and it didn't qualify him then and it doesn't qualify McCain now.

Obama is greatly overrated in my opinion, but the Obama-Biden ticket is not a capitulationist one, even if it does accept the support of the surrender faction, and it does show some signs of being able and willing to profit from experience. With McCain, the "experience" is subject to sharply diminishing returns, as is the rest of him, and with Palin the very word itself is a sick joke."

Christopher Hitchens, Conservative writer & Iraq War Supporter

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's time for John McCain to fire his campaign. He has nothing to lose. His campaign is totally overmatched by Obama’s. The Obama team is well organized, flush with resources, and the candidate and the campaign are in sync. The McCain campaign, once merely problematic, is now close to being out-and-out dysfunctional. Its combination of strategic incoherence and operational incompetence has become toxic.

William Kristol, Fox News Commentator

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Obama-Terry Voter, anyone?" I’ll admit it: I’m voting for Obama and Lee Terry. Why? Because I want our officials to work hard, to be honest, exhibit strong ethics and be accessible. That’s Lee Terry. Ever talked with Lee? I have. You ask him questions, you get straight answers. I like that. Please join me in voting for Lee Terry. Paid for by Lee Terry for Congress"

Campaign Ad paid for by Lee Terry, incumbent REPUBLICAN running for re-election to Congress in Nebraska's second congressional district.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Do I believe in John McCain? Not as much as I used to. Do I believe in Sarah Palin? Despite my early enthusiasm for her, now not at all. Do I believe in the national Republican Party? Not in the slightest -- even though I see no meaningful alternative to it. So, my choice for President in 2008, scrawled in my ballot as an act of futile protest, is Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana. If nothing else, I am confident this is the first of several votes I will cast for him in years to come."

Joshua Trevino, RedState co-founder

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Sorry Dad, I'm voting for Obama"

Christopher Buckley, Son of William Buckley

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Palin is a problem. Quick study or not, she doesn't know enough about economics and foreign policy to make Americans comfortable with a President Palin should conditions require her promotion.

Palin didn't make a mess cracking the glass ceiling. She simply glided through it.

It was fun while it lasted.

Palin's recent interviews with Charles Gibson, Sean Hannity and now Katie Couric have all revealed an attractive, earnest, confident candidate. Who Is Clearly Out Of Her League.

Kathleen Parker, Conservative columnist for the Washington Post

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conservatives who insist that electing McCain is crucial usually start, and increasingly end, by saying he would make excellent judicial selections. But the more one sees of his impulsive, intensely personal reactions to people and events, the less confidence one has that he would select judges by calm reflection and clear principles, having neither patience nor aptitude for either.

It is arguable that, because of his inexperience, Obama is not ready for the presidency. It is arguable that McCain, because of his boiling moralism and bottomless reservoir of certitudes, is not suited to the presidency. Unreadiness can be corrected, although perhaps at great cost, by experience. Can a dismaying temperament be fixed?

George Will, Fox Commentator & Washington Post columnist

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps it is important as we laugh at them for being "rats" that we keep in mind why rats desert a sinking ship. Because it is SINKING! It's called survival. And many of the best minds of the Conservative movement are beginning to suspect that the election of their own candidate, Sen. John McCain could seriously endanger our chances as a nation for survival!

It only makes sense. When your boat is sinking....SWITCH BOATS!

WHY I SUPPORT OBAMA: LEADERSHIP

2008-10-13T23:40:00.002-05:00

I am often asked WHY “I SUPPORT OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT?” This is usually followed by the comment that he doesn’t give a plan and I probably only support him because of his pretty rhetoric. So, I would once again like to address one of the many reasons he has my support...leadership and our country's need for it.

Now immediately those on the Right will rise up in arms asking how I can claim that a "community organizer with no experience" can be a better leader than a decorated war hero? The answer is simple. The complexities that will face our next president will require a wide range of talents that have been seen much more clearly in Sen. Obama than Sen. McCain. The recent financial crisis has given us an excellent example of this.

Sen. McCain has exhibited a wide variety of ever changing views on the crisis. First he tells us that "the fundamentals of the economy are sound"! Then he tells us that there are problems but he is suspending his campaign to go to Washington to solve them. (Oh, and can we cancel the upcoming debate while we're at it?) Each day brings a new idea or the promise of a new plan. But mainly Sen. McCain attacks Sen. Obama. I wouldn't mind the fact that he is continually changing his mind...this has been a rapidly growing problem that requires quick, adaptable response. But I have never felt that McCAin's views were evolving into a better solution. Instead they appear to have been a "shotgun" approach that relies on luck to find the answers. But as McCain has said before, the economy really isn't his strong suit. And as his campaign has stated, if the discussion continues to focus on the economy....McCain loses!

Sen. Obama's response has been calm and measured. Some have criticized him for not immediately releasing a statement to tell America how he would handle the situation. But this has been a national crisis and Sen. Obama is not currently the President. Any immediate response before the President's would be overstepping his authority and possibly causing further problems.

Newsweek recently did an in-depth article on the initial meetings that each campaign held to discuss the responses of the candidates to the crisis. The differences in their style lend a great deal of credence to the idea that Sen. Obama is a leader to be trusted with America's economy.

So Sen. Obama waited for President Bush to offer his plan....all three pages of it. Then speaking as the Senator from Illinois and the Democratic nominee, he offered his party's suggestions to improve the plan (addressing home mortgages, CEO compensation and oversite of the trillion dollar goverment initiative) and began working the phones to gather the votes needed.

Once the bailout was passed and the Dow continued to fall, it was Sen. Obama who spoke to the press (and the people) to explain that the bailout was only the start. He made it clear that this was not a problem that could be solved unilaterally. In a global market it would require the cooperation of other countries to calm Wall Street's jitters. Yesterday the G-7 issued a joint plan and today the Dow had a record day.

Today was also the day that Sen. Obama offered his revised economic plan taking into consideration the recent changes in the world economic climate. The plan focused on Middle Class economic relief. (A subject that McCain can't even bring himself to say; much less address.) It is designed to be a comprehensive approach to stimulating the economy through a variety of targeted financial incentives. It addresses foreclosures, U.S. infrastructure and the need to keep city and state governments financially viable. The plan has aspects that should please conservatives by giving tax breaks to start up companies and companies that create US jobs. It helps to keep city workers employed instead of being layed off due to budget cuts. And while it may not be perfect, it is a better and more comprehensive plan than any proposed by either McCain or Bush.

OBAMA'S MIDDLE CLASS RESCUE PLAN
JOBS.
(1) Tax breaks for companies that create jobs in U.S. (not new)
(2) Eliminate capital gains taxes for new small businesses and start ups. (new)
(3) Fast track loan guarantees for car makers (not new)
(4) Jobs/Growth fund -- aimed at local municipalities to keep jobs that might have otherwise been cut for budgetary purposes. (new)

FAMILIES.
(1) Middle class tax cut (not new)
(2) Calls on Congress to give rebates by Winter (new)
(3) Extend employment benefits for those who lost their jobs (not new)
(4) No taxes on unemployment benefits (new)
(5) Retirement Savings: Welcomed McCain's proposal to let people withdraw from their 401Ks, but went further: proposing people could withdraw without penalty up to $10,000 from their 401Ks through 2009. (new)

HOMEOWNERS.
(1) Mortgage Tax Credit -- worth 10% of mortgages
(2) Three-month moratorium on foreclosures (new) -- "give people breathing room to get back on their feet.

INCREASED $ FOR BANKS
(1) Have Treasury move faster on his plan to inject money directly into banks.

MAKE LOANS AVAILABLE.
(1) Create a Small Business Lending Fund (already proposed)

The latest word is that Sen. McCain will release a new plan as well. We will see what his proposed solutions are. But regardless of what they are, we have now seen the manner in which these candidates approach problem solving.

Simply put, Sen. McCain's irratic journey to solutions scares me. As candidate McCain: he is only a danger to himself. But the problem with a President McCain is that we are all along for the ride with him. He might get us to where we need to be on the economy or he might put us in a ditch, but regardless his drive will be a terrifying ride that leaves me with the sinking feeling that even if his latest plan is great...he only got there through luck and lack of oncoming traffic.

This has been a chance to watch how both candidates would handle a true emergency. This is an economic 3 AM call...and it's Sen. Obama who has answered the phone!

BROTHER, CAN YOU SPARE ME A DIME

2008-10-12T23:57:00.000-05:00

Remember the "Good Ol' Days" in the 1950's that everyone wants to go back to. (Whether you were alive during those times or not.) Back when everyone worked hard and made a good living. There were jobs for everyone and life was good!

Fast forward to the next century. Everyone seems to have one question regarding the economy lately...are we heading towards another Great Depression? People are scared and they should be. I am way too young to remember the Depression but I do remember that until the day she died at 80, my grandmother lived in fear of another one. So today, while watching the seemingly ever falling Dow numbers, I stumbled across an article that quoted a variety of figures from Paul Krugman, a noted economics professor & writer. And they were very troublesome. Not because they show the same type of slide that we experienced in the 30's (after all back then 1 out of every 4 Americans were out of work). But they do seem to indicate one set of numbers that correlate to the time BEFORE the Depression started. Those numbers revolve around the distribution of wealth in America.

In 1928, one year before the crash that started the Depression, 1% of the population owned 40% of the nation's wealth. Once FDR's new deal started, you saw between the years of 1930 and 1947 that the working class wage rose an average of 67% while the income of the wealthiest 1% dropped 17%. (I would feel bad for the top 1% but they still made more money than everyone else by far.) This was the birth of the middle class and it was a direct result of unionization of manufacturing jobs and the New Deal.

Between 1947 and 1973 the inequality of income lessened even more. With working class wages rising 81% and the income of the top 1% rising 38%. (Note: These numbers reflect "real wages" adjusted for inflation.)

Then came the 70's! More bad times that were shared between both the richest and the middle class. Between 1974 and 1980, a combination of higher oil prices, too much influence of unions and a generally bad world economy meant that the working class lost 3% in real wages while the wealthiest 1% lost 4% of income. Proving that too much of a good thing, be it unionization or tax breaks are not necessarily a good thing. You never want the pendulum to swing too far to either the right or the left.

Enter the savior Ronald Reagan! His tax revamps once again helped the wealthiest 1% to earn a larger percentage piece of the pie. Under Reagan & Bush tax plans, the real wage for the working class fell by 1%, but the income for the wealthiest 1% increased by 135%! This difference is a direct result of "trickle down economics" and the tax policies that "trickle down" represents.

The inequity slowed slightly during the first years of a Clinton presidency and then skyrocketed again once the Republicans gained control of Congress. By 2006, under President Bush and a Republican controlled Congress the top 1% of the wealthiest Americans controlled 34% of America's wealth! The wealthiest 5% of Americans now control over two-thirds of America's wealth as well as 88% of the nation's business interests & almost 80% of America's stock wealth (After today's market close, you are allowed to chuckle a little if you like the thought that they now own four fifths of "not much"). (But don't chuckle too much since your retirement is tied into this mess as well.) This is where you are allowed to notice the similarities to 1928.

Now the argument of the top 1% is that they spur the economy on with thier purchasing power. But it doesn't seem to work well that way. If a really wealthy man spends ten million on a new yacht...it helps the yachting industry. If a million working class Americans spend $10 each on food...it helps thousands of restaurants and grocery stores across the country. It takes less time to spread through the economy to help society as a whole. When the distribution of wealth varies so much between the working class and the wealthy, the economy gets top heavy...and falls! Only certain very limited sections of society patronized by the rich make a living.

Now don't get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with making lots of money and becoming wealthy. That's the American Dream. But there are limits. The average CEO of a Fortune 100 company makes on average 17.6 million dollars per year. That's approximately $8,461.00/hour! That means that the average Fortune 100 CEO goes to work on Jan. 2nd and by the time he knocks off for lunch he has earned more on his first day of work by lunchtime than the minimum wage employee will earn all year. Now it may be that his expertise is worth that much to the company...though one would think that if they were THAT good at their jobs, we wouldn't be bailing them out now!

We need to look at CEO pay. We need to restore tax equality to our nation. We need to stop rewarding companies with tax breaks who outsource jobs overseas! Otherwise the question will not be...is another Depression coming? The new question on everyone's lips will be "Brother can you spare me a dime? and "Which way to the nearest soup kitchen"?

YOUR PAL, "AL"

2008-10-07T21:02:00.004-05:00

There have been many stories commenting on the crowd reaction at the latest rallies of VP candidate, Governor Sarah Palin. She has gone on the offensive against Sen. Obama in an extremely personal way. The attacks have been very inspiring to the crowds. There have been numerous reports of people yelling "terrorist" and at least one man has screamed "kill him" at yesterday's rally.

The anger of the crowd has also been directed towards the media. At least one African-American technician was called a "racial ephitaph" and then was told by another crowd member to "Sit down, BOY!".

Most people just see personal attacks as a sign that the McCain campaign is desperate and would rather talk about anything than the economy. And that is probably true! But to work a crowd up to the point where there are cries to KILL the opposing candidate takes this election into a very scary place. This is not the type of discourse that our founding fathers had in mind when they dreamed up this exotic scheme called "Democracy".

Because of Sen. Obama's unusual background he is very open to character attacks. His father is foreign born. Less than 8 years after the attacks of 9/11, his years in Muslim Indonesia give us even more to fear because we don't "know him" that well. His college teachings make him seem elitist and not "one of us". Many on the left would have you believe that these fears of Americans are nothing but blatant racism. But they are wrong. It is more than that and it is less than that. More because there are a great many Americans with legitimate objections to Sen. Obama's policies. Less because it is not just "rascism" like we think of during the Civil Rights Movement. There are no dogs & fire hoses or burning crosses. It's a kinder, gentler form of bias. But it is still a bias against that which we are not familiar with.

I think it is the combination of all of these things that make some of us wonder about Sen. Obama. He's not like other candidates we grew up with. But it is too simple to pin the problem on any one thing like racism. And lucky for John McCain because it gives him plenty of ammunition to attack with.

I think our fears have more to do with our buddy, Al! Who is Al, you ask? I don't know him...you do. We all know an Al in our life. "Al" is the person we see to be the exception to the stereotype.

We may not like immigrants because they are lazy and steal jobs and don't pay taxes...they're not like my pal Al, who I work with. He's ok. (Cause you know him.)

We like working for Al, he's not like most white people who try to keep a "brother" down. He's always got your back!

"AL" plays on my school's baseball team, his family eats funny food but he's a great pitcher!

"AL" just moved here from New York City, but he's pretty smart for a "city slicker"

I go to church with Al's wife and she's so sweet, not angry like a lot of "those" women!

You know Al. Maybe he's the gay man who's not like the "rest". Maybe he's the Hindu who waits on you at your favorite restaurant. But Al is the great hero in the battle against racism & predjudice in this country. He's the ONE you KNOW that helps you realize that all ethnic & cultural groups are composed of people. Some good and some bad. All you had to do to realize this is to get to know AL. He's basicly like you and me. Loves his wife and kids, wants to provide for them, wants to see his children grow up in the greatest nation on earth. It's hard to continue believing something about a culture, race, gender or whatever when you actually KNOW someone who is a part of that group. The "idealized" group becomes a little less real than the PERSON you know.

As Sen. Obama has become better known to more and more of the electorate, his favorability ratings have also increased. He's not so strange and foreign anymore to a larger portion of the electorate. He's becoming a political "AL".

This is natural. What is not natural is to try to stir up hatred and fear for a fellow American. It's wrong. Debate the issues. Discuss the failings of Obama's policies, but remember that he is still one of us. He may be wrong in his judgment but he is NOT a terrorist infiltrator. That's just silliness that gets promoted when someone gets behind in the polls.

So in the hopes of reminding everyone that Sen. Obama is an American, a father & a husband: here are some photos from his past. They look a lot like photos all of us have. They are part of America's Story. They should not influence you to vote for or against him because there is nothing special about them. They are a part of "Al's Story" and not the photos of a terrorist or traitor.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/03/the-obama
s-anniversary-al_n_131721.html?page=12&show_comment_id=

16417017#comment_16417017

We must focus not on the personal for this election but on the issues. We must vote for who we think will promise the best future for our children & grandchildren.

POTS, KETTLES, AYERS & FRIENDS

2008-10-05T21:41:00.002-05:00

A long time ago, like last year, John McCain spoke a great deal about the importance of running a civil campaign that focused on the issues important to the American people. Now sources within the McCain campaign have been saying for several days that McCain would go REALLY NEGATIVE because changing the discussion off the economy is his only way of winning. McCain's own campaign believes that when the focus is on issues: OBAMA WINS!

It also seems that the sources were right. Shortly after this news was posted, Gov. Palin began quoting a New York Times article discussing Sen. Obama's association with 60's radical William Ayers. "Palling around with terrorists" is how the Governor characterizes the issue. The facts are clear.

1) William Ayers was a member of the WEATHERMEN UNDERGROUND in the 60's.

2) He was on the run for years because of the bombings done by the group.

3) He has never been convicted of a crime...his trial was thrown out for "prosecutorial misconduct".

4) He is currently a Professor of Education at the University of Illinois.

5) He has authored or edited over 15 books and is a nationally recognized authority on school reform.

6) He is consulted by the city of Chicago on school reform.

7) He did work with Sen. Obama on projects in Chicago.

8) He did host a fundraiser for Obama early in his career. They both live in the same neighborhood.

9) Sen. Obama has condemned his past activities publicly on several occasions.

The same news article that Palin quotes also definitely states that while Sen. Obama has "underplayed" their relationship there is NO "close connection" between the two.

The reality is simple. The whole idea of politics is to meet as many people as possible and to convince them to support you. (It doesn't necessarily mean that you support them back!) POLITICS MAKES STRANGE BED FELLOWS. And "guilt by association" is a dangerous tact to take in a political campaign because few politicians have spotless records and all fall victim to S.B.S.

"Strange Bed-Fellows Syndrome (S.B.S.) is all about the people the candidate meets along the way. It means Sen. McCain goes on G. Gordon Liddy's radio show proclaiming Liddy to be "an old friend". G. Gordon Liddy has contributed frequently to John McCain's campaigns including his current one. G. Gordon Liddy is a convicted burglar. He has also confessed to the following:

1) plotting to kill the journalist Jack Anderson

2) plotting to firebomb the Brookings Institute

3) developed a plan for the Nixon Administration to kidnap "leftist guerillas" (read that protestors) to keep them away from the 1972 Republican National Convention

4) acknowledged his willingness to kill anyone who tried to stop him from his second break-in of a psychiatrist's office

5) has on numerous occasions instructed his radio audience on how to shoot federal A.T.F. agents

Not exactly the kind of friend your Mom wanted you to hang out with when you grow up! The difference between Obama/Ayers & McCain/Liddy is that Obama will discuss the issue and the McCain campaign ignores all requests for comment on G. Gordon Liddy and his relationship with the Senator. Senator Obama condemns the past activities of Ayers while McCain pretends it didn't happen.

STRANGE BED-FELLOWS SYNDROME (S.B.S.) could also require asking about Sen. McCain's connection with his father-in-law whose money helped fund his first Senate campaign and who has been linked to underworld figures out west.

S.B.S. could also re-look into Sen. McCain's associations with Charles Keating and the KEATING 5! It was a long time ago and he was only reprimanded by the Senate but hey it's still out there. And as Sen. McCain once said, "if Americans want to talk about a subject...we should"

Governor Palin is also susceptible to S.B.S. Her current minister is from Africa and got his start there with "witch hunts". And we're talking real witches. He drove a woman from his village who was casting spells on people to cause car wrecks! Became quite famous for that episode in Africa. Rev. Thomas Muthee has recently had a guest speaker in his church that made questionable statements on Jews from the pulpit with Palin present in the audience. Rev. Muthee has blessed Palin's bid for Governor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwkb9_zB2Pg (Notice the references to witches about 1:45 into the clip)

You could also ask why Gov. Palin was willing to address the annual convention of an Alaskan Indepencence Party whose goal is succession for Alaska from the United States of America. (How does this work with "Country First"?) Maybe she addressed them because her husband was once a member. And while it's never been PROVED that Palin was a member, several members of the group seemed to think she was!

Do ANY of these associations mean you SHOULDN'T vote for McCain/Palin? Probably not. The issues McCain/Palin represent as a ticket are much more important to me than the people they have met along the way to becoming a ticket. But it's only fair to look at them if you look at everyone that Obama has had contact with.

The truth of the matter: The McCain campaign wants to turn your focus from policy comparisons to a referendum on the character of Sen. Obama. And Sen. Obama is no "dirtier" than the McCain/Palin ticket. If there was real "dirt" on Sen. Obama the Clinton Campaign would have found it and used it!!! McCain can't argue that he's more "presidential" than Obama because the world saw how he handled the bailout crisis. All that's left are personal attacks. Perhaps McCain/Palin should heed the words of Christ and "let he who is without sin cast the first stone!"

As Americans it is important that we ignore the "silly" in this election cycle and instead look to the future. When you hear the upcoming attacks & smears, when you read the chain e-mails proclaiming "Obama is a muslim, the anti-christ or even Donald Duck" the question to ask is: Who's policies will best help our country? Who will leave a more stable and stronger country for our children and our grandchildren? But if you are listening to McCain/Palin question the associates of Sen. Obama, it's nothing more than "the pot calling the kettle black".

PALIN DEBATE STRATEGY

2008-10-04T11:03:00.001-05:00

DICK 'N SARAH: A TALE OF TWO VEEPS

2008-10-03T01:51:00.001-05:00

The much anticipated Vice-Presidential Debate is now over & the spin has begun. Just like the last debate, Republicans say Palin won & Democrats say Biden won. It was actually a bit anti-climatic. He didn't gaffe, she didn't freeze, the "biased" moderator didn't wear an OBAMA MAMA t-shirt. In a few days we will see if the polls shift any and that should show us who really won and lost.

I spent a lot of time today explaining to people that I didn't really expect her to be as horrible as she was for the Couric interview and I was right. She appeared much better tonight than she did on CBS. Palin gave us lots of folksy charm and even a cute little wink at the camera....I hope you felt as special as I did. But we didn't get lots of real information from her.

And that I find both sad and frightning! Sad because I feel that it is important that she answer questions to prove she is ready to take over on day one. (You may not think Obama is ready, but you have had over two years of non-stop interviews, speeches and media stories to make your decision: we've had five weeks to make that same decision about Palin) I realize that many believe that MSM is biased against her, but if she can't stand up to MEET THE PRESS, how will she stand up to _________? (Insert the name of your own favorite dictator.)

What frightened me was when she did answer a question. Especially the question concerning the Constitutional role of the Vice-President. Palin wants the office to "have more authority". She feels the Constitution is “flexible,” allowing a McCain-Palin administration to “do whatever we have to do to administer very appropriately the plans for this nation.”

This is especially scary since Dick Cheney does not believe that the office of the Vice-President falls under either the legislative branch or the executive branch of government. That (according to Cheney) means that the Vice-President is not responsible to either branch. Instead the office is a island unto itself. That philosophy has allowed him to advocate for torture, develop energy policies behind closed doors, refuse to answer oversight questions from the legislative branch under oath, etc. In short, he has made the office a law unto itself...and we have suffered as a nation for his arrogance.

Today's CBS interview let us know that Sarah Palin thinks that the only mistake Cheney made as Vice-President was while he was hunting! When you look at Troopergate (and her refusal to answer questions) you have to wonder how far she would be willing to take the Cheney philosophy. You also have to wonder if we should be even more worried about the similarities between Sarah Palin and Dick Cheney than the similarities between John McCain and George Bush.

THE DAY I MET PAUL NEWMAN

2008-09-29T02:59:00.000-05:00

Many years ago Kansas City was visited by Paul Newman & his wife during the filming of MR. & MRS BRIDGES. I was working downtown and my wife was working at Fedora's on the Plaza at the time. Mr. Newman developed a fondness for Fedora's and my wife saw him there frequently. He was always friendly with the staff, liked all types of food but preferred hamburgers. He also liked his privacy. Very rarely did he ever speak to other guests or care to meet them.

I happened to be walking down the street on Baltimore one day just as he and his entourage came walking past. I knew he valued privacy, but I couldn't resist. I called out, "Mr. Newman, I watched SHADOW BOX (a movie starring his wife & directed by him) last night and it was incredible!"

To my complete surprise he stopped short and spun around asking, "Where did you see that at?"

I explained that I had rented it and asked a couple of questions about some of his choices as a director. He answered the questions and asked me a couple of questions about the film. Then the door to his trailer opened and Joann Woodward stepped out looking for him. The look on his face was incredible. You could tell that he loved her greatly. He turned back to me, flashed me that movie star grin and said, "Isn't she lovely?"

He then realized that other people has noticed us and he nodded to me, said "thank you" and walked quickly away.

I've always remembered that brief meeting. Not so much because he was famous, but because he so obviously loved her. I'm sure she knows that. I hope she also knows that his love for her was one emotion that this intensely private man didn't mind sharing with a complete stranger on the street.

Our thoughts are with you, Ms. Woodward.

God Speed, Mr. Newman.

OBAMA AND THE BAILOUT

2008-09-22T03:04:00.004-05:00

On Sunday, Sen. McCain attacked Sen. Obama for not having offered a plan to solve the latest financial crisis to hit Wall Street. He accused Sen. Obama of once again playing politician and not offering the leadership the country needed from a president. This would have a certain level of humor if the subject was not so serious. McCain is a man whose first reaction was to threaten to fire the head of the SEC. (Which is not something the President can do.) Even George Will called McCain's behavior "unpresidential" But in one respect Sen. McCain was correct, Sen. Obama did not offer presidential leadership! This may have had something to do with the fact that Sen. Obama is not currently the President of the United States and this is a crisis.

Sen. Obama's response was to stay calm and wait for the designated leader of the country to make the decisions that are his to make. Obama made frequent calls to many legislators on both sides of the aisle to discuss the problem. Then on Sunday after the President had offered his plan, Sen. Obama spoke on 7 principals that he felt the plan must meet to be approved by Congress. He did not say he would not support a bailout. He stressed the importance of this legislation passing Congress quickly, but he refused to write the President a blank check. He spoke as a Senator entrusted to be the legislative branch of the government. He also showed us what would be important to a President Obama if he were faced with a similar situation as President Bush is currently. (It should also be noted that several of these principals are things he has spoken on in the past on the campaign trail as early as last year. Unlike Sen. McCain, Sen. Obama seems to have seen some form of this problem coming.) So here are those principals taken directly from a transcript of Sunday's speech.

No blank check. If we grant the Treasury broad authority to address the immediate crisis, we must insist on independent accountability and oversight. Given the breach of trust we have seen and the magnitude of the taxpayer money involved, there can be no blank check.
Rescue requires mutual responsibility. As taxpayers are asked to take extraordinary steps to protect our financial system, it is only appropriate to expect those institutions that benefit to help protect American homeowners and the American economy. We cannot underwrite continued irresponsibility, where CEOs cash in and our regulators look the other way. We cannot abet and reward the unconscionable practices that triggered this crisis. We have to end them.
Taxpayers should be protected. This should not be a handout to Wall Street. It should be structured in a way that maximizes the ability of taxpayers to recoup their investment. Going forward, we need to make sure that the institutions that benefit from financial insurance also bear the cost of that insurance.
Help homeowners stay in their homes. This crisis started with homeowners and they bear the brunt of the nearly unprecedented collapse in housing prices. We cannot have a plan for Wall Street banks that does not help homeowners stay in their homes and help distressed communities.
A global response. As I said on Friday, this is a global financial crisis and it requires a global solution. The United States must lead, but we must also insist that other nations, who have a huge stake in the outcome, join us in helping to secure the financial markets.
Main Street, not just Wall Street. The American people need to know that we feel as great a sense of urgency about the emergency on Main Street as we do the emergency on Wall Street. That is why I call on Senator McCain, President Bush, Republicans and Democrats to join me in supporting an emergency economic plan for working families – a plan that would help folks cope with rising gas and food prices, save one million jobs through rebuilding our schools and roads, help states and cities avoid painful budget cuts and tax increases, help homeowners stay in their homes, and provide retooling assistance to help ensure that the fuel-efficient cars of the future are built in America.
Build a regulatory structure for the 21st Century. While there is not time in a week to remake our regulatory structure to prevent abuses in the future, we should commit ourselves to the kind of reforms I have been advocating for several years. We need new rules of the road for the 21st Century economy, together with the means and willingness to enforce them.

As a Senator, these points clearly show a legislator who understands his role in the process. The executive branch has proposed a solution, the legislative branch discusses the idea focusing on how the plan solves the problem and makes recommendations and changes before making it a law for the executive branch to enforce. Sen. Obama played his part in the process during a crisis. Sen. McCain campaigned.

WHY I SUPPORT OBAMA: ENERGY

2008-09-21T17:34:00.003-05:00

I am often asked WHY “I SUPPORT OBAMA FOR PRESIDENT.” This is usually followed by the comment that he doesn’t give a plan and I probably only support him because of his pretty rhetoric. So, I would like to address one of several areas that Sen. Obama has a plan for that is better than Sen. McCain’s plan: ENERGY. This is not the only reason I support his candidacy, but it is a major reason for that support.

Both Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain have fairly similar plans for a comprehensive national energy policy. Both want to improve auto mileage standards (although the Obama plan is more aggressive), both want to make better use of alternative energy sources that include bio-fuels, wind and solar. Both see alternative energy as the “space race” of the new millennium, a way to increase American technology and to create jobs for a struggling economy. Leading Americans forward to develop new resources is a goal of both men. The differences are mainly found in their stance on drilling and their view on nuclear energy.

So why is this one of the MOST important reasons I support Sen. Obama? Because it is so important and we are so short of time to make progress. The issues we discuss today are issues that we knew were issues in the 70’s….we just did nothing about them. And that is one of my fears of McCain. He has been in Washington as a Senator for 28 years and has done nothing to develop alternative sources. In fact, Sen. McCain has voted AGAINST bills that would have promoted their development on at least nine separate occasions. Drilling, nuclear energy, new sources will all take time to bring on line. We don’t have much time. The longer that we wait for the RIGHT solution, the harder it will be to break our dependence on foreign oil. The Middle East is extremely unstable and unfortunately our livelihood as a nation is tied directly to our need for foreign oil. Due to the Iraq War, we have lost what little diplomatic influence we had. The Iraq War has proved the difficulty of using military force to stabilize one country much less the entire region.

It will be essential for the next president to lead us into a new way of thinking about our energy usage. That requires both vision and the ability to inspire Americans to support the changes needed. I think Sen. Obama is the one best suited to inspire us to change. I also think that his younger age gives him the ability to think outside the box more than Sen. McCain. I feel he is more in touch with the younger generation who will ultimately have to change their lifestyle to adjust to the new technology.

One of the greatest critiques of alternative energy is that the technology has not been available. But now it really may be. Over the past two years there have been two massive developments concerning alternative energy. The first is the development of a flexible solar panel. It is made of a flexible film that converts ALL wavelengths of light from ALL angles. It can be bent to fit any shape and placed anywhere. It currently has limited availability but will be widely available in three years. The second is the plan proposed by T. Boone Pickens to turn large areas of the Midwest into wind farms. These wind farms are located in remote areas and have the added advantage of bringing a viable industry to rural America. Having a major business figure behind a company designed to seriously promote alternative energy is a major asset that has been missing from the equation for too long. Both McCain & Obama have expressed interest in his plan.

But if the plans are so similar, why do I support Obama on his energy policy? Because of the differences! Sen. McCain is too intent on drilling to solve our problems. While more drilling is going to be necessary in the future, it is not the answer to our problems. For one thing we don’t have enough oil to make a significant difference. America uses 25% of the world’s petroleum, but we only control at best estimate 10% of the world’s oil. No matter how much we drill, we will need to come up with other sources of energy. Not only would it take years to drill, we do not currently have the refining capacity to make the oil useful. There is also a backlog in the industry of new well installation as it is. (Just because you authorize more drilling doesn’t mean that the drill platforms will get set up any quicker.) Also, the oil will be placed on the world market for bid, not kept solely for U.S. consumption. So drilling would be advantageous for oil companies, but Americans get no such promises.

There are those who insist that we have more oil than the experts think. “How do we know how much oil we have until we drill”, they ask. The problem with that philosophy is that we don’t know. This philosophy is a little like going “all in” on a poker hand without knowing for sure what your hole cards are. It’s a suckers play.

Sen. McCain also favors nuclear power. The problem with that is three fold. One, if an accident happens the consequences are unbelievable for anyone nearby. While I realize that we have gone for many years without an accident at a nuclear facility…it only needs to happen once. Two, we have to store the used uranium somewhere safe. That becomes a real issue as the French are discovering. (They supply most of their energy needs through nuclear power, but are discovering that they are running out of space to store the waste. Never confuse the term “LOTS” with infinite. Eventually you have more waste than safe places to store the waste.) Three, the cost and time to build ONE new reactor is huge. Sen. McCain’s energy plan calls for 45 new reactors at a total cost of 315 Billion dollars! There are other avenues that will show results sooner and cheaper than we can bring new reactors on-line. Those are the options we should focus on.

Senator McCain has also seen a tendency to pander to us with silly energy ideas. He offers a huge reward for the first American to build a better battery for auto use. The reason this is silly is simple. Anyone who invents such a battery will make a fortune off of the patent rights! People are already researching hard to achieve this goal without the “reward” because the idea is worth so much on its’ own. His battery reward is a trick of smoke & mirrors to make you forget that Sen. McCain has been in the Senate for 28 years without working on this issue before.

He also advocates a “gas tax Holiday”. But those gas taxes are what we use to maintain and build new infrastructure for our highways. So while I am able to save about $100 a summer (I drive a lot for my job) it won’t save me money if I bust an axel on a road that hasn’t been properly maintained. Sen. Obama has been honest with us about why he sees it as a bad idea and that is refreshing in this election.

It seems that most of America falls within two camps now, those who feel that drilling will save us because we have more oil than we realize and those of us who think it is essential that we move away from an oil based energy policy. At this stage, nobody really knows who’s right or who’s wrong. The difference is that if I’m wrong and we build this great infrastructure that emphasizes alternative energy...we have the alternative sources and more oil. That means the price of oil goes down. If I’m right and we run out of oil (or are cut off by embargo or the wells are damaged in a hurricane) then your children will spend some future winter night sitting in a very cold and very dark house telling stories to your grandchildren about the “good old days”.

THE EXPERIENCE OF JOHN McCAIN

2008-09-21T17:28:00.002-05:00

We are often told in this election that only a fool would vote for an untested politician like Sen. Obama. In these times of crisis the man with the most experience is the one who must be President. But experience is useless without the virtue of learning from your experiences. And here I think John McCain comes up short.

One of the original Reagan foot soldiers, John McCain has held a life long belief in the private sector being unfettered by government regulation. In the late 1980's that lack of regulation led to the collapse of the savings & loan industry. (It also earned the young Senator from Arizona a reprimand from the Senate Ethics Committee, but that's another story.)

Now some 20 years later, following six years of a Republican Congress and Republican President, we have had the opportunity to again test the principal that ALL government regulation is bad. And in the last few weeks we have seen the results. The bailouts being proposed now make the Savings & Loan Bailout look like small change.

But up until 48 hours ago, Sen. McCain continued to insist that we MUST DEREGULATE! Which of course is the teachings of his top economic advisor Phil Gramm who engineered the original deregulation of the banking industry some 10 years ago.

Sen. McCain has even proposed putting Social Security into privatized hands (which of course meant your retirement was in your hands, same as your mortgage and your mutal fund.). Looking at the ups & downs of the market this last week make that a bit scarier today than it was six months ago.

But the best is this quote that will be appearing in an upcoming magazine article written by the EXPERIENCED John McCain. The title of the article is BETTER HEALTH CARE AT LOWER COST FOR EVERY AMERICAN from the Sept/Oct 08 issue of Contingecies.

"Opening up the health insurance market to more vigorous nationwide competition, as we have done over the last decade in banking, would provide more choices of innovative products less burdened by the worst excesses of state-based regulation."

I don't know about you but that quote makes me feel a little ill. (Note: He also plans on making your health care contribution taxable as opposed to both the present system & Sen. Obama's health care.)

So what we have is an article that was written so recently that it is yet to be published that describes a health care system with all the safe guards of the banking industry. It trumpets the wisdom of deregulating the banking industry. Current events seem to call into question his judgement, since for the last 48 hours he's been "Mr. We-Need-To-Regulate-This-Problem McCain". We know he promises to fix it "so it never happens again", but wouldn't it had been nice if he had learned his lesson during the 80's?

And we know he also wants to do the same thing to Social Security. DOES THIS SEEM WISE TO YOU? Experience without wisdom is nothing to brag about.

OBAMA DELAYS WITHDRAWING TROOPS?

2008-09-15T23:19:00.001-05:00

The latest Obama news story to sweep the internet is one that comes from that bastion of excellence in journalism, THE NEW YORK POST. Amir Taheri wrote that in July, Sen. Obama spoke with members of the Iraqi government and urged them to delay any agreement with the US to begin troop withdrawals. Every conservative blogger (and several major news sources, including Fox News) not only ran with the story but they all expressed similar outrage over the indignity of wanting to keep the troops there. “WHAT??? Sen. Obama is willing to keep our soldiers over there longer because it helps his political career? It only goes to prove he doesn’t “put country first”! He’ll do ANYTHING to win an election! And besides, he’s a Muslim too!”

Taheri wrote a great article for the Post. Very in-depth, with quotes attributed to the Iraqi Foreign Minister Zebari that claimed Sen. Obama made the delay a focal point of his talks with the Iraqi government.

Being a supporter of Obama’s and knowing the less than sterling reputation of the Post for journalistic standards, I wondered about truthfulness of the story.

So I googled the author of the article; Amir Taheri, and found some interesting facts about the man. He was a Senior Editor for a major Iranian newspaper under the Shaw of Iran’s government. He is now a political refugee from Iran who has advocated for the overthrow of the present government. He is also an advisor to Pres. George Bush. Here is a man who’s ONLY hope of returning to his homeland rests on the hopes that either the US or Israel will overthrow the government of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. (Now if that doesn’t raise an eyebrow and make you question the authenticity of this story I don’t know what will.)

Unless of course it’s the number of times he has been caught fabricating sources, quotes and story lines before in his writing. What you ask? He lied? How could that be? I read in on the internet!

Here are the real facts about the man accusing Sen. Barack Obama of meddling in George Bush’s foreign policy.

1) Most famously, on May 19, 2006, Taheri wrote a story for Canada’s NATIONAL POST about a new Iranian law requiring Iranian Jews and other religious minorities to wear colored badges at all times while on the streets of Tehren. This caused an immediate sensation and was picked up by many mainstream media sources and ran as a legitimate story. The bloggers went crazy with this story. But the story was simply NOT TRUE! Within hours the NATIONAL POST was alerted to the problem and had pulled the story from their website, blaming Taheri for misleading them.

2) In 1989, Taheri published a book about the rise and fall of the Shah of Iran entitled “NEST OF SPIES”. Larry Cohler-Esses wrote of the book in THE NATION, that it cited "nonexistent sources," it fabricated "nonexistent substance in cases where the sources existed," and distorted the facts "beyond recognition.” Other than that it was a really nice read.

3) In 2005, he said that Iran’s Ambassador to the UN had taken an active part in the takeover of the US embassy in Tehren in 1979. This too went all over the internet. It was however disproven by the Ambassador’s teacher! "This allegation is false," San Francisco State University professor Dwight Simpson wrote to the New York Post (which had published a Taheri column making the claim). "On November 4, 1979 [the day of the seizure], Javad Zarif was in San Francisco. He was then a graduate student in the Department of International Relations of San Francisco State University. He was my student, and he served also as my teaching assistant." Somebody is obviously lying, and I know who I’m betting on.

So we now have a highly provocative story written by a questionable source with no outside confirmation by any other news source. But that hasn’t stopped Fox News and other media outlets from running with it as if it were gospel. It hasn’t kept it from being the blog of the hour on numerous sites.

It’s hard to decide who you want to blame more for this type of shoddy journalism: The media that doesn’t do it’s job in checking sources or the conservative bloggers who happily spread rumor without thought to truth. Or maybe as Pogo once said, “We have met the enemy and they is us.” You know; US, people like you and me who know better but don’t demand the standard of excellence from our media that we deserve both individually and as a nation.

So if you see this story printed anywhere, let the person promoting it know that you know who Amir Taheri is…and you expect more from them than slander, innuendo and lies. You expect NEWS!

MORE LIBERAL MEDIA BIAS?

2008-09-14T23:40:00.001-05:00

Many in the media have recently begun to question some of the claims of Sen. McCain. Some have dared to call him a flip-flopper or even liar. And the response from the conservative right has been predictable. It's not Sen. McCain's fault, it's the liberal media's bias that is really behind these accusations. It has nothing to do with lies and false statements on the part of Sen. McCain...and besides Obama's worse!

But apparently it's not only the liberal media that is starting to call him out. Recently, Sen. McCain spoke in Lee's Summitt, MO. This resulted in McCain being written up as a flip flopper and fibber by THE ARMY TIMES?

At the rally he attacked Obama for trying to "slow our development of Future Combat Systems" McCain excalaimed, "This is not a time to slow our development of Future Combat Systems."

Now Future Combat Systems (FCS) is an Army program that is exactly what it sounds like, research into new weapons. The program is constantly behind schedule and overbudget. Nobody denies that fact. But to hear Sen. McCain tell it, Obama has already cancelled the program and given our soldiers socker boppers to defend themselves with.

The truth is that Sen. Obama wants to “cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending....I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of Future Combat Systems.”

The Army Times then went to an Obama military advisor for followup questioning. “Obama had said that he wanted to review FCS and he thought that he might want to slow the fielding,” former Sec. of Air Force F. Whitten Peters (and Obama advisor) said. “His feeling is there really needs to be an overall strategic review of larger weapon programs to decide which ones are sufficiently important to keep going and which ones may need to be scaled back.”

So McCain lied about Obama's stand on the issue. But even worse is that as recently as July of this year, McCain was telling the Washington Post that he wanted to cut FCS entirely from the Pentagon budget. No review, no tweaking the program....JUST CUT IT!

The Army Times then quoted Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute (a conserative think tank) who compared the two Senators views on the military budget.

“Future Combat Systems is the centerpiece of Army modernization. However, McCain has been more critical of it than anyone else in the chamber. Obama has been much more detailed and thoughtful in his comments about future military investment than McCain’s very superficial statements.”

So we end with a news outlet associated with the military quoting a conservative think tank spokesman who says Obama is detailed & thoughtful while McCain is superficial. It must be media bias! That's what made the Army Times run a headline reading "Flip Flop or Fib"!

And to no one's surprise, the McCain campaign declined to comment to the Army Times regarding the article.

In this next election Americans must decide between a leader who looks to "detailed and thoughtful" analysis versus the "grill buddy" who's "superficial" views decide the direction of our country. But hey, that's probably just more liberal media bias.

EATING BOOGERS & BRIDGETTE McCAIN

2008-09-13T01:29:00.003-05:00

In the last 24 hours I have seen two different people ask Sen. McCain the same basic question. "Why do you approve the message of campaign commercials that are proven lies?" I've wondered how the engineer of the "STRAIGHT TALK EXPRESS" would answer this question. I have had no idea how he could reconcile his sense of fairness with the lies being put out by his campaign presumably in his name. And I have not been alone in my wonderment. Many of McCain's friends on the left (most notably James Carville and Chris Mathews) swear that it must be the campaign and not Sen. McCain. "He's too good for that", they say. Well now we know.

Sen. McCain's answer was in two parts both times and the same both times. First he tells us that the tone of the campaign would have been different if Sen. Obama would have done town hall meetings with him. Then he tells us that "this is a tough campaign". How incredibly first grade of him! You remember back in grade school, when you didn't want to play at someone's house so they told the rest of the class that you "eat boogers"! It's pretty much the same mentality. Whether Sen. Obama was right or wrong to turn down the town hall meetings, it should not influence your personal behavior. Come on Senator, show some personal responsiblity.

This is something new for McCain. He really didn't start these "swift boat-esque" attack ads until his campaign hired the same people who smeared Sen. McCain in the 2000 primary. You know the people who claimed he was crazy and had an illegitimate black daughter? Worked for Karl Rove & George Bush. Now they work for McCain and they are still very good at their job!

I suppose that the bottom line is that it's politics. But I had hoped for better from Sen. McCain.

One does wonder what Bridgett must think about this? Who's Bridgett you ask? Bridgett McCain is the adopted daughter of Sen. John McCain. She is never seen on the campaign trail (and rarely mentioned). Years after the 2000 election, she googled her father's name on the internet and was horrified by the terrible things said about her. She was embarrassed. Cindy McCain said that to protect her, they don't take her out on the trail anymore. (And I'm not blaming her for that. It shows parental responsibility) But I do wonder what Bridgett thinks about this. How must it feel to know that your step-father wants to win so bad, he's willing to hire the man who smeared his daughter.

Sen. McCain, you probably do eat boogers!

UPDATE:

This Sunday on Fox News, Karl Rove weighed in on McCain's attack ads.

"McCain has gone in his ads one step too far, and sort of attributing to Obama things that are, you know, beyond the 100-percent-truth test," said Rove. "Both campaigns ought to be careful about... there ought to be an adult who says: 'Do we really need to go that far in this ad?"

WHEN KARL ROVE THINKS YOUR TV ADS GO TOO FAR, YOU HAVE OFFICIALLY "JUMPED THE SHARK"

REMEMBERING

2008-09-11T09:27:00.001-05:00

Seven years ago, at just about this time of morning....our world changed forever. Today, is to be a day of rememberance and mourning. A day that we should remember not only for the loss and the terror, but for that fleeting time that we as a nation came together in common cause. For in the days following the attack, we as Americans became one nation, united in purpose.

So let us put aside our differences today to remember. Remember Flight 93. Remember the Pentagon. Remember the towers crumbling while filled with the brave souls of the firemen and office workers. Remember the pain we felt as we asked each other, "did you know anyone...?"

But most of all remember...that we as a nation are greater than the sum of ourselves. That we are the greatest nation on earth and that is a reputation that we have earned, but must re-earn each day. Remember, reflect and let us honor those who died with the actions we take today and tomorrow. Remember!

VOTE YOUR POCKETBOOK

2008-09-08T18:19:00.001-05:00

Those tax & spend Democrats are at it again. Recently, the Tax Policy Center did a review of the tax differences between Obama and McCain. We’ve all seen the ads that tell us that Obama will raise your taxes and Sen. McCain will lower your taxes. Obviously, it is in your best interest to vote for McCain because it will save YOU money! In fairness, Sen. McCain is not lying! He will lower the tax rate for every American!

The catch (because there’s always a catch in politics) is HOW MUCH your taxes are lowered depends upon how much you make. For instance if you make $50,000.00; your taxes will go down by $319.00 or 0.6%. But if I make $600,000.00 my taxes will decrease by $45,361.00 or 7.6%. Huh? Pardon my cynical nature, but why does the man who is making TWELVE times more than you GET A TAX CUT THAT IS 7% MORE THAN YOURS? (Guess I must have worked harder for my $600,000 than you did for your paltry $50,000.)

Now under the Obama plan, the taxes on my $600,000.00 WILL go up. I will spend an extra $115,974 in taxes. So McCain didn’t lie! Sen. Obama will raise taxes ON EVERY AMERICAN MAKING OVER $600,000.00. How dare he? And how much will Obama raise taxes on your $50,000.00? NOT AT ALL. In fact, if you make $50,000.00, under the Obama tax plan you will pay $1,042.00 less than you do now. (That’s a 2.1% decrease in your taxes as opposed to Sen. McCain’s 0.6% decrease.) And how does Senator Obama plan to make up the difference? By cutting the tax breaks given to the rich by President Bush!

If you want to see where you will fall under each plan go to the following link:

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidat
es_taxproposals_tpc/?postversion=2008061113

Another difference between the two plans: If you are retired and making less than $50,000 per year, under the Obama tax plan you won’t pay taxes on that $50,000.

And another: Currently if you receive employer-based health insurance it is not taxed. Under the McCain health care plan you WILL pay taxes on the money paid towards your health care. (This doesn’t get much mention in his stump speech but it is in his Health Care Plan.)

Several years ago, multi-billionaire Warren Buffet made an offer to donate $1,000,000.00 to the charity of choice of any Fortune 500 CEO who paid the same percentage tax rate as the CEO’s secretary. The money remains unclaimed to this day. Senator Obama may cost Warren Buffet a million dollars by leveling the tax rate in America.

Some people will try to tell you that it is not fair for the rich to have to pay more than anyone else. But the reality is that during the Bush Administration we have been fighting a war in Iraq on credit. Borrowing as much money as we have has caused the dollar to plummet. This means different things to different classes. I recently listened to a woman in a grocery store with two small children try to decide between milk or meat because she couldn’t afford both. That’s what a weak dollar means to the poor. Today, I stood behind a woman at the bank who was forced to cancel her vacation to Europe. So instead, she’s going to Latin America for vacation because the dollar is so much stronger there. That’s what a weak dollar means to the wealthy.
Bottom line, regardless of what the Republicans try to tell you…Sen. Obama is much friendlier to the middle class than the McCain Campaign ever dreamed of!

VOTE YOUR POCKETBOOK!

McCAIN CALLS THIS SUPPORTING THE TROOPS?

2008-09-08T03:32:00.001-05:00

One thing that always bothers me in blogging is the number of people who are willing to call me Un-American because I tend to be more liberal than they would like. Somehow being anything other than Super Conservative gets you labeled as unpatriotic. People constantly throw Republican's out as the ones who support both troops and America as if the rest of us do not.

This especially makes me mad when no one questions John McCain's support of the troops. I know he was a POW (he's told us many times). But that does not necessarily make him overly supportive of the troops. In fact, it seems to make him even harder on them, expecting more & more from them because after all they have it easier than he had it.

A recent example is that he did not support the Veteran's Benefit package that recently passed Congress. Some would have you believe that it was because it was laden with pork....but according to Sen. McCain it was because the education benefits would be so good that people would leave the service to go to school rather than enlist for another term of service. The military's own analyists claimed that the number of troops who left the service would be offset by the number of new enlistees who wanted to earn the benefits. But that didn't matter to McCain. (Maybe someone who ranked 894 out of 899 in the Naval Academy doesn't see an advantage in education.) The really sad part is that all the bill did was improve today's benefits to equal what was given to our WWII vets. (Come to think of it, it was also the same thing offered to John McCain for his service.)

But on Sunday, McClatchy News ran a story that really questioned McCain's concern for our troops and their families. Apparently in the late 90's he was approached outside his office by a group representing Vietnam MIA families. They were trying to find out information about thier missing family members. During this period they were very vocal and very much underfoot in the Capital. Still, I think the sacrifice made by thier children earned the parents better treatment than how six separate people claimed John McCain treated them on this day.

"Six people present have written statements describing what they saw. According to the accounts, McCain waved his hand to shoo away Jeannette Jenkins, whose cousin was last seen in South Vietnam in 1970, causing her to hit a wall.

As McCain continued walking, Jane Duke Gaylor, the mother of another missing serviceman, approached the senator. Gaylor, in a wheelchair equipped with portable oxygen, stretched her arms toward McCain.

"McCain stopped, glared at her, raised his left arm ready to strike her, composed himself and pushed the wheelchair away from him," according to Eleanor Apodaca, the sister of an Air Force captain missing since 1967.

McCain's staff wouldn't respond to requests for comment about specific incidents."

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/51660.html>

IF YOU ARE SUPPORTING ACTIONS LIKE THIS, HOW DO YOU QUESTION THE PATRIOTISM OF THE LEFT?

GUSTAV & PUTTING AMERICA FIRST

2008-09-01T14:42:00.000-05:00

Dear Senator McCain:

You have constantly told the American people that the reason we need to vote for you is because you (unlike Sen. Obama) put America First....Always.

Now with Hurricane Gustav making landfall (and Hurricane Hannah right behind) you have the opportunity to show us that you mean what you say. The safety and needs of the people living on the Gulf Coast override the needs of either campaign.

I applauded your decision to alter your convention schedule to "take care of necessary business" only. That is a wise move. I love the idea of turning the Republican Convention into a "telethon for Hurricane Victims". That is a wonderful idea that helps people.

My only question about your handling this is your insistence upon traveling to the area. DO YOU REALLY THINK THAT YOU AND YOUR ENTOURAGE ARE NEEDED IN THE GULF AREA?

Seriously, I was horrified to see that less than 24 hours before a major storm hits, you & your VP are touring the disaster relief coordination center. Did it ever occur to you that the line of people standing around to shake your hand might have something more important to be doing during the 24 hour countdown to landfall? Did some poor nurse in a local hospital start muttering obscenities when she was told that she not only had to prepare for possible hurricane refugees that she must also meet the protocols that are required of hospitals when a president or candidate are in the area? Was there a cop who had to pull an extra 5 hours of duty to make sure you were safe when he had no idea if his own family was taken care of?

I realize as a candidate you have to be aware of what is going on. But for the love of God, country and every individual that had to make time during their preparation for the storm....send a trusted advisor with a cell phone! It's a great device. It gives you instant communication with a trusted set of eyes to report back to you. If there is a problem, you can respond....without the interruption of Emergency Service Personnel. All of whom, have thier hands full right now. Call a governor on the phone. If Bobby Jindal was good enough to be on your short list for VP, surely he can give an accurate report of the facts on the ground.

On Thursday, BE IN ST. PAUL for your speech, not the Gulf. They need to clean up. They need to get Americans back in their homes. They need to get electricity back to those homes. THEY DON'T NEED TO BE CARING FOR YOU! Seventy two hours after a hurricane, the personnel needed to watch you are needed for other things...and if not, there is always SLEEP. (Which no disaster relief worker ever gets enough of)

Remember how insulting it was that during Bush's great speech from the center of New Orleans that he was the only person for miles that had access to electricity? Wouldn't he have been thought better of if he had put the crews that set up his speech to providing generators for those that lived there & had no electricity?

There is nothing you can say from the Gulf that can't be said from the Convention Stage. (Put a damn picture of the damage behind you on a screen & say you're there for all I care. But stay away! Leave the workers in peace to do thier job.)

The only real advantage for you in being in the Gulf is that of the Photo Op! Photo Ops do not show you putting America First! Maybe you are concerned about photo ops this time around. Remember the photo op you had with Bush during Katrina? That great picture of you & W. eating Birthday cake as Katrina roared ashore?

I have news for you. That photo is no reflection upon you. You were at the time the Senator from Arizona. You are responsible for disasters in Arizona...not the Gulf. George Bush should be ashamed of it, but it's no reflection on you. You are still only the Senator from Arizona, so stop trying so hard and think about the people in the path of the Hurricane. Stay out of the way of the rescue effort and spend time in St. Paul raising money to help.

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION:

2008-08-24T23:27:00.000-05:00

Dear Attendees of the Democratic National Convention:

TODAY IS THE FIRST DAY OF THE REST OF YOUR LIFE!

Remember that phrase from childhood? Maybe you read it on a calendar or on the card attached to a floral bouqet. It's become such a catch phrase that we don't think about it anymore.

But what an incredibly liberating statement it becomes when you stop to consider it. "Today" is what matters for action, "tomorrow" is endless possibilities. "Yesterday" is simply done.

Nothing we do can change the past.

EVERYTHING we do can change the future...for good or ill! And that is an incredible responsibility placed upon us both individually and collectively by whatever higher power you may believe in.

Today the eyes of the nation are on you and the convention. We have been fed this image of hysteria and venom filled riots on the convention floor and throughout the streets of Denver by the media. We wait for the chaos with all the eagerness of a NASCAR fan seated on his couch awaiting a wreck. DENY US THIS PERVERSE PLEASURE!

Take a moment before the start of this historic event and ask yourself, "What do I want my Grandchildren to be taught happened here?" And then begin the first day of the Democratic Convention and the rest of your life.

You see, I feel that this is THE election! The nation has seen just how bad it can get and we the people are the only ones who can stop the destruction of our country. (And I'm not talking about Democrats only. We the people include Independents and even some Republicans who are scared by where Bush has taken us.)

Over the past eight years, we have seen the Constitution compromised, an energy policy developed in secret by a Vice-President & the Energy Companies, we have watched 4,000 of our children and countless Iraqi children die because of non-existant weapons, we have learned to spy on our selves without warrants, we have "outed" our own spies, we have deregulated our financial institutions to the point of collapse, we have spent ourselves into record deficits.

THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT JOHN MCCAIN AGREED TO THIS NIGHTMARE 95% OF THE TIME!!!! That's our real enemy. Everything else is secondary. And while you are having your "carthartic moments", the Republicans are laughing at you. Because they know that nobody is better than Democrats for holding to high ideals with little thought to pragmatic solutions. Democrats don't believe in compromise. That why Independents vote for Republicans more often than not.

You see, Republicans will make a deal with the Devil to keep power (and often have I am told). Democrats will vote for Ralph Nade because Al Gore isn't green enough!

Now is the time for the Democratic Party to come together and stand up in one voice. Not because you agree with everything your party stands for...but because millions of Independent voters are watching you. Waiting for the car wreck.

Now is the time to move forward and show the undecided Independent voter that Democrats offer something different than the last eight years. You can make your actions in Denver something that promotes the greater good or gives the McCain Campaign a good laugh. And that's why today is so important for you and me and all our children.

TODAY IS THE FIRST DAY OF THE REST OF YOUR LIFE!

SADDLEBACK FEEDBACK

2008-08-18T23:59:00.001-05:00

Saturday Night’s Political Forum hosted by Pastor Rick Warren was one of the most interesting campaign events this year. It was nice to hear someone from the right argue that it is essential that Americans (both conservative & liberal) learn to argue their viewpoints WITHOUT demonizing the other side. In coming to terms with the idea that we are all Americans (even when we disagree) we build upon the idea that we are greater as a nation together than we are as the sum of our separate ideologies.

I was impressed with how quickly Sen. McCain answered. He was direct and to the point. “On Message” as they say. When others suspected that he knew the answers in advance, I doubted it. I simply saw it as someone who has practiced turning every question to a preset campaign talking point. It’s an old debate trick and Sen. McCain seems very good at it. (Case in point: when asked by a reporter on the campaign trail to defend his love of the musical group ABBA, Sen. McCain explained that his musical development was interrupted by his five years in a POW camp.) Any and all questions leads back to either:
1) The Surge Worked
2) Drill now and drill everywhere
3) I was a POW
4) Life begins at conception

Senator Obama gave very nuanced answers. He frequently fumbled for the right way to express himself. This was seen by many as a sign of his inexperience and unsuitability for the job and I am not sure that it is an accurate assessment. Keep in mind that this was not particularly friendly territory for him and ANY misstatement would have been instantly jumped on by the McCain campaign, news anchors and the evangelicals. One could hardly blame him for weighing every word.

There are two kinds of people in the world, those who see everything in terms of black & white and those who see the world as more complicated and filled with shades of gray. Sen. McCain sees clear cut answers to all problems. Senator Obama does not. The question of “when does life begin” is an excellent example of the differences. Senator McCain responded, “Life begins at conception”. That’s an answer short and sweet enough to appear on a bumper sticker. Many people (and most of the audience) agree with this viewpoint. Obama didn’t answer the question directly. He replied that if you are pro-life, you won’t agree with any definition but the one that McCain would eventually offer to the crowd. Sen. Obam realizes that an equal number of people disagree with that definition as agree with it. So Senator Obama’s discussion centered on finding a center ground that both sides could come to terms with….work together to reduce the number of abortions.
Who’s right & who’s wrong? Let’s look at a couple of hypothetical examples:
“Jane” is a 17 year old high school senior who discovers she is 6 weeks pregnant seven months before her senior prom….she decides to have an abortion. It’s her second one. It’s her choice but most pro-choice people I know would be disgusted with her actions.
“Jill” is a 30 year old stay at home mother of two who discovers she is six weeks pregnant three weeks after her husband is killed in an accident. He had no insurance and she has no job. She is told her unborn child will be born with a chronic illness that will require extensive care for the life of the child. She is also told that in giving birth she stands a good risk of not surviving the pregnancy herself. Does she risk her life (as the single mother of two other children) to bear a child she cannot afford to raise and will never be adopted because of the chronic health problems? Under pro-life beliefs, she has no choice.

This is the reason why I don’t like “bumper sticker” issues. Most things in life are too complex to boil down to simple answers. And Senator Obama seems to recognize that. I don’t mind that his most profound ideas come from pre-written speeches. I like the fact that he thinks about all aspects of a problem before speaking out. If he isn’t as good with an off the cuff comment…I can live with that if he comes to the right conclusions.

Senator McCain showed a strong willingness on Saturday night to confront evil! But what does that really mean? Tienamen Square in China in the 80’s was EVIL! How should we have confronted it? Invade Bejing?

In 2001, McCain told CNN within a month of 9/11 that we should attack Iraq because of 9/11! (We see how that is working out. Even the Bush administration now admits that Al Quida was not in Iraq (pre-9/11) and that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. But John McCain wanted to “hit back”.) I would hope that America has seen the problems with “cowboy diplomacy”.

All the media talking heads looked at who won and who lost. And in doing so they missed the whole point. I appreciated the opportunity to see both candidates answering the same questions. We did get the opportunity to compare “apples to apples”. And it served to remind me, that the presidency is not a game of “gotcha”, with the person scoring the lowest gotcha number winning the prize. An election, should be about examining how the candidate comes to a conclusion on what is the best course for our nation to take. It’s not necessarily how you say it…it’s what you’re saying that counts.

HOW I LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING...

2008-08-15T23:24:00.004-05:00

“I looked the man [Russian Prime Minister Putin] in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul.”
George Bush on Russian Prime Minister Putin

“When I looked at Putin’s eyes I saw 3 letters: KGB”
Sen. John McCain

“I’ve expressed my grave concern about the disproportionate response of Russia and that we strongly condemn the bombing outside of South Ossetia”
George Bush interviewed on NBC Sports

“With our allies, we now must stand in united purpose to persuade the Russian government to end violence permanently and withdraw its troops from Georgia. WE ARE ALL GEORGIANS!”
Sen. John McCain

“Yesterday, I heard Sen. McCain say, ‘We are all Georgians now, Well, very nice, you know, very cheering for us to hear that, but OK, it’s time to pass from this. From words to deeds.”
Georgian President Saakashvili

“The United States spent 45 years working very hard to avoid a military confrontation with Russia. I see no reason to change that approach today.”
US Sec. of Defense Robert Gates

“The United States of America stands with the democratically elected government of Georgia, [and] insists that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia be respected.”
President George Bush

“One can forget about any talk about Georgia’s territorial integrity”
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov

“In the 21st Century nations DON’T invade other nations”
Sen. John McCain

“The Americans can take Baghdad…we can take Tbilisi [capital of Georgia].”
Russian Soldier in Georgia speaking with NPR.

“The current demand for our forces exceeds the sustainable supply. We are consumed with meeting the demands of the current fight [in Iraq] and are unable to provide ready forces as rapidly as necessary for other potential contingencies”
Army Chief of Staff, Gen. George Casey during a congressional hearing

“Well boys, I reckon this is it-nuclear combat toe to toe with the Roosskies. Now look, boys, I ain’t much of a hand at makin’ speeches, but I got a pretty fair idea that something doggone important is goin’ on back there. And I got a fair idea the kinda personal emotions that some of you fellas may be thinkin’. Heck, I recKon you wouldn’t even be human bein’s if you didn’t have some pretty strong personal feelin’s about nuclear combat. I want you to remember one thing, the folks back home is a-countin’ on you and by golly, we ain’t about to let ‘em down. I tell you something else, if this thing turns out to be half as important as I figure it just might be, I’d say that you’re all in line for some important promotions and personal citations when this thing’s over with. That goes for ever’ last one of you regardless of your race, color or your creed. Now let’s get this thing on the hump-we got some flyin’ to do!”
Major T. J. “King” Kong in the film DR. STRANGELOVE

The country of Russia is estimated to have over 6,000 nuclear weapons in it’s arsenal. It also has more natural gas and oil reserves than even the Middle East. One fourth of ALL European natural gas is supplied by Russia. In recent years it has shown no hesitation in using those supplies for political gain, often by cutting off heating supplies in the middle of winter. Russia is also one of the few countries with ANY influence over Iran.
Perhaps America needs to reconsider how important it is to think and to talk before threatening action that cannot be sustained in a realistic manner. “Cowboy Diplomacy” makes for great movies…but the consequences in the real world can be deadly.

“A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?”
The computer Joshua from the movie WAR GAMES

GOT SLEEP?

2008-08-11T12:57:00.001-05:00

The New York Times did a story on Sen. McCain that seemed ripe for late night jokes...until I realized that the subject matter really wasn't funny.

According to the Tmes, Senator McCain was asked about whether he was going to take any vacation time during the Olympics. He responded that he might take a day or two off but "they" always filled those days up with briefings, meetings, etc and it wasn't really any time off.

“What makes the difference, ..., is getting enough rest. ‘If I can sleep in until about 7:30 or 8, then it really helps me,’ Senator McCain said. ‘I think when I get up real early, like 5:30 or 6, and don’t go to bed until 10, 10:30 or 11, it seems to help me [to] get up a little later in the morning. If I put in three or four 18-hour, 20-hour days in a row, then I’m not sharp,’ he said. ‘It’s just a fact.’”

I don't know about you, but 6:00 AM to 11:00 PM is a pretty normal day for me (maybe even a short one on average) AND I'M NOT A PRESIDENT. What happens when that proverbial "3 AM phone call" comes? Because 3:00 AM is obviously not a good time for John McCain. Do we want a cranky, "not sharp" president handling an unexpected situation without enough sleep? I mean we have all seen the number of "gaffes" he has made on the campaign trail already. Did lack of sleep figure into those mistakes?

I realize that consecutive 18-20 hour days are not the norm for most people, but sometimes the world doesn't take American convenience into thier crisis scheduling.

These comments really scared me! Anyone remember how much fun the last six months of Reagan in office was? The stories that kept creeping out about him sleeping through Cabinet meetings. Remember how after his Alzheimer's was announced, we all began to wonder how advanced was his condition during his last few months in office?

Got Sleep John McCain? GOD I HOPE SO....for all of our sakes!

THE REST OF THE STORY

2008-08-10T18:34:00.001-05:00

Recently, news has surfaced that foreign-born and non-citizen muslims are contributing money to try to influence America's next election. Florida businessman Harry Sargeant III, chief executive for I.O.T.C. has "bundled" at least $50,000.00 for the election from a variety of foreign-born sources. These sources include: Ibrahim Marabeh (a store manager for RITE-AID) and his wife; Nadia and Shawn Abdalla (owners of Twilight Hookah Lounge famous for it SEX ON THE BEACH tobacco blend) who are not even registered voters and Sargeant has also received contributions for his candidate from a California Taco Bell shift supervisor among many others. All of them with muslim backgrounds and many from relatively low wage jobs. All who claim that a mysterious & forgotten "friend" asked them to contribute the money.

How does he get donations from such esteemed sources?

"I have a lot of Arab business partners. I do a lot of business in the Middle East. I've got a lot of friends," Sargeant told the [Washington] Post. "I ask my friends to support candidates that I think are worthy of supporting. They usually come through for me." These friends include his business partner, a citizen of Jordan and brother-in-law to the King of Jordan. And this is where it really gets interesting.

IOTC stands for INTERNATIONAL OIL TRADING COMPANY and it has over a billion dollars in contracts with the US Defense Department to supply fuel to Iraq. The website ProPublica reports:

"The company, which had not done any government work before it first won that contract in 2004, signed a two-year extension worth $913 million in 2007. But there have been difficulties. The contract requires that the fuel be brought through Jordan to Iraq -- meaning only the company with a "letter of authorization" from the Jordanian government could have stood a chance. ..., IOTC managed that feat by striking a deal with the king of Jordan's brother-in-law. Even though other companies bid on the contract, and IOTC was not the lowest bidder, IOTC was the only one with authorization and so won the contract. (The brother-in-law is suing IOTC, claiming he was cut out of the spoils. He wants $13 million for his trouble.)"

Congress has opened up an investigation into the activities of IOTC to see if there was issues with the setup for the contract and if the government is being overcharged for the fuel. Sargeant insists that the contract is "in the best interest of the military and the U.S. taxpayers." That remains to be seen. But there is no doubt that many of the political contributions he "bundled" are illegal under US laws that prevent foreigners from contributing to campaigns. In fact over $50,000 have been returned from the campaign to charity.

So my question is: where is the outcry agains these muslims who are breaking the law? Is the reason that there is so little media attention on this because we have decided that we love muslims or is it because the candidate who received the money was SEN. JOHN MCCAIN? ( I can just imagine the blogs if Sen. Obama had received money from any illegal sources, much less Muslims.)

Now in fairness, we should point out that it is impossible for any candidate to keep track of all of his donations and sources. It should also be stated again that McCain did return the money. Normally, I would say that this should be the end of it. But there is still one little bit of info that people should know: Harry Sargeant III, CEO of IOTC (currently under investigation) is also the Finance Chair for the Florida State Republican Party and Co-Chair of the McCain Victory Campaign. This wasn't just any Joe Shmoe from off the street bundling money....it was a trusted member of TEAM MCCAIN. And now you know the rest of the story.

SUMMER BLOCKBUSTER REVIEW

2008-08-03T20:16:00.008-05:00

This year’s biggest summer blockbuster may never be seen in the theatre. This year the prize for most hyped movie of the summer goes to campaign attack ads or….ATTACK OF MCCAIN: AD WARS 08! Featuring an all-star cast that includes Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, Charlton Heston and of course this summer’s biggest celeb…THE CHOSEN ONE! OBAMA!!!!!

Following in the footsteps of Oliver Stone, Director (and campaign manager) Rick Davis has woven fact & fantasy into a carefully crafted tale of an ideological, young politician who spouts beautiful rhetoric while attempting to wrest the prize of the presidency from political legend John McCain. While on his quest, Young Obama is seduced by the DARK SIDE of politics. He begins a great struggle to keep the people under the control of the EVIL EMPIRE OF FOREIGN OIL. Thirty year political veteran John McCain is pulled from retirement to stop Obama’s evil mission and save the free world from itself. After an intense confrontation involving charges of racism and light sabres (think George Lucas meets BLAZING SADDLES) we realize that Obama has a messiah complex that brings back the ghost of Charlton Heston (a special treat for NRA viewers) to end the onslaught of evil that follows Young Obama where ever he goes.

Shot as a series of vignettes against the backdrop of Europe, the Mid East and an Ohio German Sausage Shop this is one movie you won’t be able to miss this summer….no matter how hard you try! (McCain is spending $140,000.00 per DAY to run the Britney/Paris ad alone.)

In the long run though, ATTACK OF MCCAIN seems a bit unfulfilling. Historically it is a little too inaccurate. In the first vignette we learn that Obama only visits troops if he can bring along cameras. And following the lead of Oliver Stone, facts are not allowed to interfere with the story line. Subsequent reports showed that Obama never intended to take press but that does nothing for advancing the McCain: America's Hero storyline.

The film also doesn’t follow the established time line well. Young Obama complains that “they’ll try to scare you by saying I don’t look like the president on the dollar bill” and McCain immediately calls it racism. A great scene but it seems to forget about the previous McCain short, SEAL A lovely June 08 straight-to-internet prequel that features a dollar bill with Obama’s head super-imposed over the president’s head. Ooops! I know it’s only a movie but you like it to follow it’s own history.

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDTJDv4hevU&feature=related)

The biggest issue is that the audience finds out a great deal about how bad Obama is; but learns little if anything about what McCain stands FOR. It leaves you yearning for a return to the themes of his 2000 masterpiece, THE STRAIGHT TALK EXPRESS. But unfortunately, stars do age and it may be that today’s McCain is just not up to the same level of performance that he used to be. (Hey, even Sean Connery doesn’t do action films anymore.)

The reviews have been mixed. Veteran star, McCain says it’s “humorous” and claims he’s “proud” of his work this summer. Life-long character actor & perpetual movie sidekick Joe Lieberman says rising young star Obama is a “gifted and eloquent young man not ready to lead”.

But others have not been as kind.

Oh, well, I didn't see it -- I think it's kinda stupid," she says. "I'm just too old-hat for it. In fact, the other two, I didn't even know who they were.

Roberta McCain, mother of star John McCain
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

“There has been a very intentional effort to paint him as somebody outside the mainstream…he’s not one of us….I think the McCain campaign has been scrupulous about not directly saying it, but it's the subtext of this campaign. Everybody knows that. There are certain kinds of signals. As a native of the south, I can tell you, when you see this Charlton Heston ad, 'The One,' that's code for, 'he's uppity, he ought to stay in his place.' Everybody gets that who is from a southern background. We all understand that. When McCain comes out and starts talking about affirmative action, 'I'm against quotas,' we get what that's about."

Republican David Gergen, Advisor to both Republican & Democratic Presidents

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I think we should be in a post-racial environment…I think Sen. [Barack] Obama has done an admirable job of that. I don't think he has race-baited. I think he has been very good about that."

Sen. Mel Martinez, R-Fla., a supporter of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I found this McCain campaign ad "The One" to be one of the most offensive ads we have seen in American politics to date.

At best, this ad implies that those who plan to support Senator Obama are looking for a new savior or a replacement Messiah. But many are reading it even more darkly as an attempt to portray Obama as an anti-Christ figure.

A vote for Senator Obama is a vote for the man we think will make the best President, not for a new Messiah. As Christians, we have one Lord And Savior. Jesus Christ. It is blasphemous to suggest otherwise.

And it is beyond offensive to suggest that Senator Obama is a false Messiah or the anti-Christ himself. How low can we go? It shows the McCain campaign is willing to make a mockery of our faith to feed people's fears. Christians need to reject this out of hand.

Mara Vanderslice, founder and director of the pro-Obama religious group Matthew 25 Network
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And I think Kathy Hilton summed it up perfectly:

I've been asked again and again for my response to the now infamous McCain celebrity ad. I actually have three responses. It is a complete waste of the money John McCain's contributors have donated to his campaign. It is a complete waste of the country's time and attention at the very moment when millions of people are losing their homes and their jobs. And it is a completely frivolous way to choose the next President of the United States.

Kathy Hilton, Mother of Paris Hilton and financial contributor to McCain’s Campaign.

Who would have thought that Paris’s Mom would be so smart? Because the real tragedy to this “summer blockbuster” is that elections shouldn’t be “Hollywood” and Ms. Hilton is correct….frivolous is the last thing this country needs right now. John McCain is doing America a great disservice by focusing this election on the “plot lines” he wants instead of the real issues facing us all.

COMMANDER IN CHIEF?

2008-07-30T11:05:00.002-05:00

Just thought you might like to take a look:

DID JIM ADKINSON READ YOUR BLOG?

2008-07-28T15:40:00.002-05:00

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO FORWARD TO ALL EXTREMIST BLOGGERS

Yesterday morning, Jim D. Adkisson walked into a Tennessee church with a 12 gauge, semi-automatic, shotgun and 76 rounds of ammunition. He began to shout “hateful things” according to witnesses and then proceeded to open fire on the congregation that was gathered to watch a children’s play. Two were killed, seven were wounded, five of whom were critically injured. All were traumatized, especially the children on stage.

According to a letter found in the killer’s car, the reason was his hatred of the liberal agenda of the church.

Below I have listed one quote from the letter. Can you guess which one it is?

1. Liberalism IS a confirmed Mental Disorder.

2. Yes, and when free thinking American Patriots take back this country, one of the first orders of business will be to deal with all of you idiotic, liberal, bleeding heart, anti American traitors appropriately

3. We have a traitor among us. GET A ROPE

4. The revolution I spoke of will not be North against South, but will be free thinking American Patriots against anti American traitors such as you, aks/ablaze, and the rest of the bleeding heart, liberal idiots

5. you anti American, liberal traitors still refuse to face the facts, and continue to live in a state of brainwashed, blind denial..

6. Muslims are a cancer on this planet, and guess what? I'm not joking 1 bit.. I say drop a nuke on the mid-east and then stuff pork up their *ss's!

7. I think pink is great color for liberals, that and yellow

8. Liberals are a cancer on the world.

9. Why is it that spoiled kids of prominent people always become liberal and bitter, but have never made much of a difference in anything??

10. [I have a] stated hatred of the liberal movement

11. As a veteran I say to you be thankful for the anonymity the internet gives you, there are probably more than a few ex-military on this site that would get gratification from a face-to-face with you, but you are not worth going to jail for. You are despicable and disgusting. Go see your proctologist, you may be developing brain damage. Now FOAD!

12. Why don't we test out your real courage and pick a nice quiet dark spot to meet so i can bust your jaw. No more words, Just you, me, and blood. You talk awfully tough on the internet now let's test out what your REALLY made of.

The statement written by the gunman was number 10. (One of the mildest statements from the list) Your next question should be: where did you get the rest of these quotes? The answer is simple.

Every quote (other than #10) listed, came from a MYFox Local website from across the country.

We must always remember that we as a nation are more than conservative & liberal. WE ARE AMERICANS. We can disagree on the direction of our country, but we must learn to control our love of hateful rhetoric. God alone knows how many blogs Adkisson read before he decided on his own twisted and warped answer to the problems of our country.

Maybe Jim Adkinson read YOUR blog!!!

(And this should not just be a warning to conservative bloggers. There are a great many liberals on Daily Kos and other left-leaning sites that can be just as bad.)

GOD SPEED GREG MCKENDRY

2008-07-27T22:45:00.000-05:00

It's happened again. Another place of safety and refuge has been invaded by the violence of a world slightly off-kilter. This morning during a performance of "ANNIE" at a Unitarian Church, a lone gunman walked in and began to fire. And as seems to always happen during these moments of insanity....one person reminds us that we can be a little better than we thought.

In coming days we will debate the reasons for the killer's actions. We will be told reasons they think he did what he did. And the reasons will fill us with dispair, for no matter what the reason we know that it was not good enough to destroy the lives of so many people.

So now, before we know why the killer acted as he did, let us remember the spirit of a good man...Greg McKendry. A 60 year old usher who was married to a woman who loved him. A foster parent and a man who helped others. He was a big man physically and cared deeply for his church and it's people. A soul who obviously believed that caring for others was worth his life. A REAL CHRISTIAN WHO SHOWED HIS LOVE THROUGH HIS LIFE.

You see, when a gunman walked into that church in Knoxville, Tennessee today, Greg McKendry stepped in front of the first shotgun blast and protected everyone behind that giant-sized body given him by his god. And God only knows how many lives he saved with that simple action. His death granted time to others to run to safety.

Tomorrow we will talk about the why and probably forget that the most memorable act was not the act of pulling the trigger...but that in the coldness of that moment, ONE MAN STOOD UP. So tonight before the media circus begins, let us simply say, "God Speed Greg McKendry. "

OILS WELLS THAT ENDS WELLS

2008-07-24T18:00:00.003-05:00

As more and more Americans feel the pinch at the pumps, our presidential candidates have turned their focus onto a new Energy Policy for the U.S. Sen. John McCain has offered us several quick solutions. He wants a gas tax holiday and he wants to open up off-shore drilling. (Which he has opposed in Washington for the last 30 years. We’ll leave the flip-flopper argument to another time.)

But what REALLY causes such high prices? It isn’t any one thing but a combination of factors that increase oil prices. Supply & Demand is an important part of this. More and more nations are using more and more oil which means we have to out bid other countries to purchase oil. The dollars we use to purchase oil with are worth less today than they were a year ago and that drives up the price. And finally, oil speculators have artificially inflated the price due to a lack of regulation on their practices.

Today, Sen. McCain was scheduled to go to New Orleans to visit an off-shore rig for a great photo op showing how off-shore drilling will solve our high gas prices. Unfortunately it was cancelled due to weather. After all, a hurricane went through the Gulf yesterday. Nobody can expect to fly over the gulf today. Except, the weather in New Orleans today was hot and clear. Four mile per hour winds with a ten mile visibility limit. Seems like today’s weather shouldn’t be a problem for helicopters.

Maybe it wasn’t the weather, maybe he cancelled because at 1:30 AM yesterday the AP reports:

“ NEW ORLEANS — The Coast Guard closed 29 miles of the Mississippi River at New Orleans after a 600-foot tanker and a barge loaded with fuel oil collided Wednesday, breaking the barge in half.

Nobody was injured, but more than 419,000 gallons of heavy, almost tar-like fuel oil spilled from the barge, forming a slick 12 miles long, said Lt. Cdr. Cheri Ben-Iesau, a Coast Guard spokeswoman.” (Note: That slick is now 100 miles long and growing.)

When you are trying to convince people that drilling is safe, you don’t want them to know that 419, 000 gallons can form a twelve mile slick and then have MSM remind you that during Hurricane Katrina 6.5 MILLION gallons of oil were spilled in the Gulf.

You don’t want people to be reminded that while the US consumes 25% of the world’s oil, even with off-shore drilling we only own 10% of the world’s oil. That’s a sizable gap to overcome. Even if we increase domestic production of oil, there is no promise that it will only be sold for domestic consumption. So we have to question how much of an impact that “extra” oil will have on the world market. Will it be enough to significantly reduce oil prices? And since it will be 5 to 10 years before that oil actually gets out of the ground…it is not a quick fix. So rather obviously, as T. Boone Pickens states, “This is one emergency we can’t drill our way out of.”

Think of it this way: I have a pot of soup of soup that will feed 100 people. I have to feed 150 people. If I add one cup of soup to the pot, I can now feed 101 people. I HAVE INCREASED SUPPLY. But, if everyone knows that 49 hungry people are not going to get soup the price of that soup goes up and the addition of one cup will do little to keep the price down. I can also expect to have 10 more people show up in line for soup while I add my one cup of soup, so now 59 people will not get soup today…unless they out bid everyone else for soup. The price of soup is going to go up!!!

This is not to say that off-shore drilling should not be examined. Whether Ecologists like it or not, we may need to drill in new areas; if not today then probably someday. Safety measures have increased over the past several decades. We do need all the oil we can get. But we have to realize that drilling is not a complete solution. It should be a possibility under discussion, not a knee-jerk reaction to filling your SUV. And the dangers inherent in off-shore drilling need to be taken into account. How do we get the oil we need without endangering the coast line. (Take away the Florida beaches and see how many tourists visit and what THAT does to the Florida economy.)

So what can be done to lower prices immediately? Unfortunately, very little. One suggestion has been that we re-instate the regulations that guided the actions of oil speculators. This was an industry that was de-regulated by Phil “The American People are Whiners” Gramm. Recently one of the largest speculators overextended and came up without enough collateral to cover its futures purchases. So SemGroup, an Oklahoma private oil marketing fund declared bankruptcy and sold its oil futures for a loss. Since that time, oil prices have fallen 14% in the last 10 days. If Congress can set new rules that require a larger “down payment” it will help to keep oil prices down. Will it solve all of our issues with high fuel costs? NO!!!!! But as we have seen, it can have a significant impact and in a short period of time. (Note: John McCain insists that the decline in price is because George Bush said he wants off-shore drilling and that was all it took. The Wall Street Journal says it was the demise of SemGroup. The question is…who do you trust? George Bush or the Wall Street Journal?)

The important thing for America is to develop the political will to decide that we HAVE to change how we think about energy. Where we get it from, how we use it and where we intend to get it from in the next year, in the next decade and beyond. That’s the real answer. We as Americans have to realize that the age of unlimited oil is gone and we must move forward to find new ways to power our country.

KNEE JERK DRILLING AND A SUMMER GAS TAX HOLIDAY ISN’T GOING TO CUT IT!

OBAMA RESPONSIBLE FOR HIGH GAS PRICES?

2008-07-22T10:38:00.000-05:00

Today, I saw an ad from the McCain campaign that states that high gas prices are because of Sen. Barack Obama. John McCain is ready to drill for oil and solve our dependency on foreign oil! Sen. Barack Obama is against off-shore drilling and THAT IS WHY GAS PRICES ARE HIGH!

I thought I remember John McCain saying that Obama's inexperience and lack of time in the Senate is why I should vote for John McCain. But now he tells me that in the short time Obama has been in the Senate he has single handed stopped all off shore drilling and driven the price up.

HUH????

I seem to remember that in 2003, Senator John McCain voted AGAINST off shore drilling. That was a full year before Senator Obama ever held the office of junior Senator from Illinois. In fact, John McCain has opposed off shore drilling for his entire 30 years in Washington. So how does he justify blaming this on Sen. Obama?

This is even more incredible when you realize that even if we authorized off shore drilling today, it would be 5 to 10 years before we saw any of that oil. And when that oil finally is pumped, it will be put on the world market instead of being kept to "reduce America's dependence on foreign oil." (Which is also an idea that Sen. John McCain has publicly supported..) The dirty little secret that conservatives would like you to forget is that all American oil is put on the world market. So even today at a time that we scream about the amount of foreign oil we import, we don't like to remember that we also export US oil to other countries. (It's called a Global Economy...for good or bad.) So when oil companies do get this oil, we will still be bidding for it on an open market against China & India.

A discussion on off shore drilling is legitimate. I don't think it will do nearly as much to reduce oil imports as people say, but it is a discussion that should be had. It is not legitimate to blame Senator Obama for the problem as the McCain ad does.

WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE STRAIGHT TALK EXPRESS?

FREE SPEECH AND THE INTERNET

2008-07-22T01:42:00.003-05:00

FREE SPEECH!!! There is no concept in America held more dear than our right to express ourselves without censorship. We have the right to say what we want, when we want…but there are some limitations. If you exercise your right of free speech and lie to a newspaper; the paper may be sued for libel. If you go on TV and lie about someone; you may be sued for slander. You can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theater without suffering criminal consequences. You have the right to tell your co-worker that you saw his wife with another man…but is it the right thing to do?

We have the right to free speech but we also have a responsibility not to misuse that right. And there has been no greater test of our belief in free speech than e-mail and the rise of the internet blogger. Anyone can create a website that says ANYTHING! Anyone can create a screen name and find the freedom to spew whatever lies they like under the pseudonym of that anonymous name. New technology grants us a greater audience to hear our voice while at the same time it helps to hide the speaker and consequently it relieves that same speaker of the responsibility for his or her speech. The result is an intricate web of deceit spread virally through the internet that creates a modern myth with little if any basis in reality. These myths then become “news” that is shown and re-shown on cable news 24/7. Senator Barack Obama has become the poster child for such attacks. There are now huge numbers of Americans convinced that he is Muslim, was sworn in on a Koran, is the anti-Christ, has a wife that hates America, will raise everyone’s taxes, hates “whitey”….need I go on? As Senator Obama himself has said, “If you see this Barack Obama, let me know. He sounds really scary”

This atmosphere of constant attack tends to make one a bit “jumpy” and I personally thought the Obama campaign overreacted to the recent cover of THE NEW YORKER. (You know the cartoon drawing; showing Obama in Muslim garb fist-bumping Michelle dressed as a machine gun toting, afro wearing, Black Panther, both warming themselves by an American flag burning in the fireplace.) It was a distraction that didn’t need a comment by the campaign…or so I thought.

I read the explanation of the cartoon by the editor of the NEW YORKER. David Remnick wrote that it “ satirizes the use of scare tactics and misinformation in the presidential election to derail Barack Obama’s campaign…. Satire is what we do, and it is meant to bring things out in the open, to hold up a mirror to prejudice, the hateful and the absurd. And that’s the spirt of this cover… [It] "combines a number of images that have been propagated . . . by some on the right, about Obama’s supposed ‘lack of patriotism’ or his being ‘soft on terrorism’ That somehow all this is going to come to the Oval Office."

It made sense to me!

Then I read a recent posting on a Fox Website regarding the same magazine cover. The blogger expressed the opinion that, “It seems to me anyone that chooses to run for president should take a good long look at the fact they will be scrutinized, made fun of, even humiliated (in some cases) because of their background or because of a stupid statement that they make.” She then closed by poising the question, “Are we to give up our "freedom of speech" and "freedom of the press" because of all the sensitivity or that it's "politically incorrect"? Come on, this is America! I say, if you choose this road, be prepared, keep a sense of humor and if you can't laugh at yourself, "pull up your big boy/girl pants" and move it or lose it.”

In general, I agree with her comments, but it was other comments she made that helped me to understand why the Obama campaign came out so strongly against the NEW YORKER’s cover. She also commented that “Frankly, I don't know if Michelle is a terrorist or not. I don't know that Barrack is a Muslim or not. I do know that as a child he was schooled in Indonesia, and that is the world's largest Islamic Country, with a 90% Muslim population. Coincidence, whatever!” And here lies the problem with the lack of personal responsibility for statements made on internet blogs. By repeating a large lie over & over, it takes on a life of its own. Many people will decide after constant bombardment of a big lie that even if the big lie is not completely true, there must be some basis of truth to the rumor. That is how one goes from “he was schooled in a Muslim country so he must be Muslim”. (Does that mean that a Muslim who goes to a Catholic school must become a Catholic?)

Perhaps most telling of all was the comment, “Frankly, I don't know if Michelle is a terrorist or not.” The blogger who already believed that Obama is a Muslim because of e-mails is now ready to believe his wife is a terrorist because of a cartoon drawing appearing on a magazine cover. (For the record, Michelle Obama is currently on leave from her position as the vice president of community affairs at the University Of Chicago Medical Center. Please explain to me how the right of Free Speech allows you the freedom to make that leap of logic!)

As a nation, we have reached the point where we must defend ourselves from the ridiculous…because there are way too many of us who seem oblivious to irony. And an election is too important to lose due to a lie made true by repetition. Freedom of Speech must not be constrained in any way, but until we learn as a nation to use make use of it responsibly on the internet we must not condemn the victims for protesting the lies spread about them.

THIS BUD'S NOT FOR YOU

2008-07-16T11:53:00.004-05:00

Recently Missourians have found one issue that seems to bind us all together....liberal & conservative, Republican & Democrat. They have come from both sides of the aisle to voice an objection to the sale of Anheuser-Busch to the European-owned InBev. Unfortunately, the uninhibited sale of a US company to the highest bidder is part of our system of Free Enterprise. So they all gave lip-service against the sale but could do nothing to stop it. It was a decision of the shareholders (as it should be). But even Sen. Obama spoke out against the sale & hoped that shareholders would remember to keep Bud an American Beer.

One political figure was silent on the sale. Now we know why. John McCain's wife may like driving around town in her sportscar with the vanity plates "MS. BUD" (when she's not flying her private plane. But you never heard her voice an objection to the sale. Nor did you hear her husband; who frequently explains how he is looking out for the American Worker, ask shareholders to sacrifice profit for the good of the Americans who hold jobs with Budweiser.

One of the concerns of an InBev buyout is that InBev has a history of buying a brewery and then cutting jobs to raise their profit margin. I hope that all the Anheuser-Busch employees (who now must worry about what changes are in store for them) remember in November who made an estimated 1 - 2 million dollars on the sale. (Insult to injury is that she will be paying capital gains tax at a rate of 15%, a Bush tax cut that McCain opposed until he ran for President. Now he supports it....wonder why?)

So why didn't either of the McCains comment on the sale in advance? How did Cindy McCain vote her estimated 40,000 - 80,0000 shares?

The next time you raise a bottle of Bud....remember: John & Cindy McCain raised not a bottle, but a finger...to all of us!

THANKS A LOT!

VIVA VIAGRA

2008-07-14T23:45:00.000-05:00

The July 9th edition of the Wall Street Journal reported the following exchange between Sen. McCain & a news reporter.

"A female Los Angeles Times reporter inquired today about comments made earlier this week by McCain campaign adviser Carly Fiorina, the former head of Hewlett Packard.

At a breakfast with reporters, Fiorina suggested that individuals–and women in particular–be given more flexibility to determine what their health insurance plans should cover. “There are many health insurance plans that will cover Viagra but won’t cover birth-control medication. Those women would like a choice,” she observed.

When McCain was asked for his position on the issue, he said—with a nervous laugh–“I certainly do not want to discuss that issue.”

The reporter pressed. “But apparently you’ve voted against—“

“I don’t know what I voted,” McCain said.

The reporter explained that McCain voted against a bill in 2003 that would have required health insurance companies to cover prescription birth control. “Is that still your position?” she persisted.

During the awkward exchange, with several lengthy pauses, McCain said he had no immediate knowledge of the vote. “I’ve cast thousands of votes in the Senate,” McCain said, then continued: “I will respond to—it’s a, it’s a…”

“Delicate issue,” the reporter offered, to a relieved laugh from McCain.

“I don’t usually duck an issue, but I’m—I’ll try to get back to you,” he explained. "

It's been a few days and I haven't heard a response from the McCain Camp! Aside from the obvious jokes, it still leaves the original question unanswered, Is it acceptable for insurance companies to cover viagra but not doctor prescribed birth control? If so, why? If not, then why did Sen. McCain vote against it in 2003?

DOG DAYS OF SUMMER

2008-07-14T03:12:00.005-05:00

Remember how as a kid, about this time of year YOU GOT BORED!!! School had been out, you had already done everything there was to do and you needed something to focus on. (This was also about the time that you started fighting with your siblings.)

We still do it as adults. Look at the Democratic Party. Bickering & picking at each other like a couple of 12 year olds because there's nothing to do until the convention starts.

I have a solution. When we got like this as kids, we played practical jokes against someone we didn't like. Last week, McCain Co-Chair, Phil Gramm said that Americans really weren't hurting from a recession....they just wanted to whine. "We are a nation of whiners!"

So let's fullfill the expectations of the elite who haven't pumped thier own gas since it was below $2 a gallon. Put the following numbers in your speed-dial...(703) 418-2008 (John McCain's National Headquarters) and (202)-863-8500 (Republican National Committee Headquarters).

After it's in your speed dial, any time you fill up with gas or pay more than you expected at the grocery store....call them up for a good old fashioned WHINE FEST! (Make sure you speak with a nasal tone & elongate your vowels). Tell them that it's really bad out here and we expect answers from our next President...not name calling!

Enjoy yourselves! After all, it's our right to have a little fun during the summer...it's not like we can afford to go anywhere.

AN OPEN LETTER TO MICHELLE OBAMA

2008-07-10T19:15:00.001-05:00

Dear Ms. Obama:

My granddaughter asked me to take her to see you today at the Women's Forum in Kansas City! She's a 12 year old, bi-racial, child of a single FATHER. (Sometimes unfortunately, it's not the father's that are missing in thier children's life.) We didn't have a ticket to get in. It didn't matter to her. She just wanted the chance to see you in person. So we went.

When I asked a campaign worker where we should stand to get a glimpse of you as you entered the building, we were told to follow him. He took us inside and seated us on the front row. I will never forget how her eyes glittered when you entered. She pointed out that you were taller in person & had a great dress on. Then you began to speak.....and she began to listen.

She listened to you and she listened to the other women on the panel & in the audience. She heard women from all social levels and all walks of life talk about the problems that women face. I think it made it easier to understand why her father so often says, "we don't have the money for that". She also realized that you don't have to sit back and do nothing but accept your life as it is. She has questions for me about the event, but she want's to think about them for a while. I hope I can answer them.

I think it was an important event for her. She saw professional women who believe they can make a difference....and I think that may have made a difference in my granddaughters life. Thank you for that! Win or lose in November....today you made a difference in one person's life.

DON'T BUY IT

2008-07-08T12:06:00.002-05:00

I am a strong believer in free speech. I think that censorship is always a slippery slope to walk. I also am a strong believer in avoiding smearing political figures. A new book about to be published has put these two beliefs in direct conflict!

Curtis Sittenfeld is about to publish AMERICAN WIFE, a new novel based "loosely" on the life of Laura Bush. It is not an overly flattering portrait and it is extremely graphic in it's description of the main character's sex life. THE PROBLEM IS...IT'S A NOVEL. (That means it's not all true!) While I might be able to understand if the writer was trying to make some statement as an author....this seems to be nothing more than a cheap trick designed to sell books. So to maintain our committment to free speech I would like to ask everyone to excercise another aspect of our rights. The right of the consumer to ignore a product.

DON'T BUY IT. DON'T PICK IT UP OFF THE SHELF & OPEN IT. PRETEND IT NEVER WAS. IF YOU GET IT AS A GIFT....TAKE IT BACK & EXCHANGE IT.

NOW CAN THEY COME HOME?

2008-07-07T21:34:00.002-05:00

"We are there [in Iraq] at the invitation of the Iraqi government. This is a sovereign nation. Twelve million people went to the polls to approve a constitution. It’s their government’s choice. If they were to say, leave, we would leave."

George W. Bush, May 2007

"Iraq said for the first time yesterday that it wanted to set a timetable for the withdrawal of US troops from its territory.

President Bush has long resisted a schedule for pulling his 145,000 soldiers out, arguing that it would play into the hands of insurgents. Nouri al-Maliki, the Shia Prime Minister, .... suggested that it was time to start setting time-lines.

“The current trend is to reach an agreement on a memorandum of understanding either for the departure of the forces or to put a timetable on their withdrawal,” Mr al-Maliki said during a visit to the United Arab Emirates"
THE TIMES, JULY 8, 2008

SO CAN WE LEAVE NOW?

VICES SAY SOMETHING ABOUT CHARACTER

2008-07-07T18:33:00.003-05:00

A recent article in TIME magazine reported on the gambling vices of our presidential candidates. Senator Obama likes $1 ante poker. John McCain prefers $1,000 dice games.

"We poker players don't call poker gambling. It is a game of skill. Craps is an absurd game of luck. You may have thrilling short term wins but only madmen play craps."

Anthony Holden, the well-known British poker-player and writer

NUFF SAID?

REFLECTIONS ON THE FOURTH OF JULY WEEKEND

2008-07-06T19:25:00.004-05:00

I was driving through one of the oldest parts of town today. The streets are lined with brownstone buildings from the turn of the century. It's not considered to be a "nice" section of town anymore. But it's filled with families from all over the world.

One old brownstone perched on the corner has a muslim family living in it. Today they had a small inflatable pool with three little girls playing in it...wearing swimsuits & headscarves!

It seems that they have created thier own separate peace between cultures.

AND THAT'S WHAT AMERICA'S ALL ABOUT!

WE THE PEOPLE

2008-07-06T13:24:00.005-05:00

This has been an unsettling time for many of the most “progressive” followers of Senator Obama. They have listened to the right condemn him for his refusal to join in public campaign finance, they have been horrified by his support of the FISA bill, he ruffled the feathers of the Congressional Black Caucus and reportedly told a former Clinton supporter that other Clinton supporter’s need to “get over it”. Now they wonder if he’s “really who they thought he was” or “he’s just a typical politician”.

If you had envisioned him as some sort of left-wing Messiah come to drive Cheny, Rove & Co. into the seven rings of Dante’s hell at the point of a fiery sword….you’re probably not nearly as disappointed now as you are going to be. If you have always seen him as a practical politician with a realistic vision of where our country needs to go and how we can realistically get there…you may be gaining some real HOPE!

Senator Obama shows a real understanding that he is running for an office that represents more than any single branch of the Democratic Party. A mayor represents his city, the Congressman his district, the Senator his state…but the President represents our country in all its multi-cultural beauty. The variety of interests inherent in the U.S. means that compromise is essential to our survival as a nation.

His change of view on the FISA bill is a great example. Which is more important? Punishing the companies who followed the government’s request after the attacks of 9/11 or ensuring that the Presidency CANNOT wiretap without over-site in the future? Which is more important? Do we want the ability to continue to protect our country from attacks in the future or is our desire to financially punish the corporate entities who failed our trust more important? (Keep in mind that if you have a 401K, you probably have stock in those same companies & it’s your retirement that is going to be hurt by a multi-billion dollar class action suit.) We should also remember that the same bill every progressive is upset about DOES NOT grant criminal liability. (Which means that the corporate executives, who decided on their own to violate our rights are still CRIMINALLY LIABLE)

Where do we turn for guidance to what is really important? Perhaps we should look to the Preamble to the Constitution…Fifty two words that sum up the whole of our political system. It is the introduction to and an outline of one of the most remarkable political documents the world has ever seen. And yet its importance is often overlooked. But not, I think; by the Junior Senator from Illinois, a former Constitutional Law Professor.

“WE THE PEOPLE (Not We the liberals or we the conservatives or we the African-Americans or we the evangelicals or we the upper-middle class. But we the people, who are greater as a sum of the whole than as our individual parts) OF THE UNITED STATES, IN ORDER TO FORM A MORE PERFECT UNION (Maybe not perfect, but at least a little better than it was before we got it), ESTABLISH JUSTICE (Not necessarily fairness), INSURE DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY (bottom line, security of our country is the primary goal), PROVIDE FOR THE COMMON DEFENSE (Not just the rich or the well connected), PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE (It is more important to look after the welfare of the group than of any single segment of the group), AND SECURE THE BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY TO OURSELVES AND OUR POSTERITY(We must look not just to what is good for us today but is good for our children tomorrow), DO ORDAIN AND ESTABLISH THIS CONSTITUTION FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.”

It has been said that “Politics is the art of the POSSIBLE”. Or as Senator Obama has said, “I know you want to go to the moon, but we only have enough gas to go “this” far”. You will never agree completely with a candidate and if you do….he or she is probably not going to be the best candidate for the country as a whole. We as a people need to remember the importance of compromise. Those who refuse to compromise hold a higher moral ground but seldom political office.

One out of four female Clinton supporters insist that they will vote for John McCain. Why? Even if you agree that she should be the nominee and the prize was stolen by the media and gender bias….will you (and our country) be better off in four years under a McCain presidency? How will you explain to your granddaughters that you voted for the man who appointed Supreme Court Judges who will roll back every advancement women have made in the last 50 years?

Remember, in 2000 three percent of Democrats voted for Nader BECAUSE AL GORE WASN’T GREEN ENOUGH!!!! Duuuh!

With all due respect to your beliefs, feelings and political goals….now is the time to “get over it” because the stakes are even higher than they were in 2000.

,

OPEN LETTER TO AMERICA'S CHURCHES

2008-07-06T12:52:00.003-05:00

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO COPY THIS OR TO FORWARD TO A FRIEND

AN OPEN LETTER TO AMERICA’S CHURCHES

As a nation, we currently face one of the most important national elections in our nation’s history. It will be an election discussed in the history books for generations to come. And it is an election that both sides realize the importance of.

Little wonder that it is also showing signs of being one of the most embarrassing elections ever. Because each side believes so strongly that it is important; there are supporters on either side willing to say ANYTHING about the other candidate.

For this reason, I am coming to you to ask your help. Since Senator Obama has announced his candidacy numerous false e-mails are being circulated throughout the web. The first round of false rumors stated that Sen. Obama is a Muslim. This is simply not true. Senator Obama speaks eloquently of discovering that the most effective means of community organizing in Chicago is through the local churches. He eventually found salvation in one of those churches and has proclaimed Jesus as his personal savior ever since. You may not agree with him regarding spiritual matters but at least give honest voice to the fact that he is NOT Muslim.

The second round was even more offensive. Lately e-mails have circulated that list “coincidences” that point to the end of the world. It then raises the question of Senator Obama being the antichrist! THIS IS SIMPLY WRONG! Throughout the history of the world people have tried to identify the antichrist. Napoleon, Hitler, Idi Amin have all shared the title. And apparently none of them were the antichrist…they were VERY bad people, but not that bad.

There is no single human more reviled by Christians than the image of this evil world leader who begins the times of tribulation. Naming this person before he is truly revealed is a very slippery slope. The Bible teaches that no one, not even the angels know the time and place of Christ’s return. So technically, no one can really know who this person is. And history teaches us that we can be wrong. By raising the specter that Obama is the antichrist, you have asked an unanswerable question and placed a lingering doubt in the minds of many believers.

This does not strike me as something a church would start. I can see others with a more urgent desire to see Senator Obama lose raise this question. They realize that every church has a member or two that would be willing to pass an e-mail along raising doubts in the mind of thousands. In other words, the Church is being duped for political purposes.

The way people just pass the lies along by e-mail, taking no responsibility for their actions, is the saddest part of all. (Because I don’t think many people truly believe this, otherwise they would be preparing to move to an out-of-the-way third world nation if Senator Obama is elected.) This is merely the 21st Century equivalent of the rumor mill, untrue gossip that we enjoy because it’s so “exciting”. By itself, it means little, but the problem is that it leaves a lingering doubt about the “character” of the candidate. “He’s probably not the antichrist, but if everyone thinks he’s that bad….there must be something to it”.

Jesus said in Matthew 12: 36-37;

“But I say unto you, that every idle word that men shall speak, they shall render an account for it in the day of judgement. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.”

If we are judged by & condemned by the words we speak idly, are we also judged & condemned by our e-mails?

I am not necessarily asking that you support Senator Obama for President. I do hope that everyone will take time to examine the issues to make an informed decision, you may find that he is a candidate you can support.

I do however ask that America’s Churches take it upon themselves to speak out strongly against these e-mails and others like them. They are nothing but malicious gossip being used to smear a good man. And even if his political beliefs are not yours, it does not change the fact that he IS a good man with a family that can be hurt by your actions.

Please use next Sunday to speak publicly on this matter This is not an issue of policy but an issue of right & wrong. IT IS WRONG TO SPREAD MALICIOUS GOSSIP BY E-MAIL AND IT REFLECTS POORLY ON THE BELIEFS OF THOSE WHO SPREAD IT.